v^" ^^ v^- '■3 r- • -i. f S. \ . ^^^z^^^^^V^ ^- -n^^ ,0 00^ v"^ S ;r. v'O ^ ^1 L;. O 'P. >■ #• .^:^^ ^\0^i '"^.S ■>. .^' 0' ^^f?3z,% '^ ]^ ^ "V~- /-. c -^^^^ *" .x-^^'*^^.- • \ o ^ / •V \ 1 « o ^^^ ^%^ o 0.^ -r^^rv-^ ^ A aX\ V r^^v I* *. % ,x^^ ^^' CO' oS -7- , ..^ - \ ' ft „ A^^' '-^r. -\^ \ V Oil on the Waters. "The North and the South, Thou hast created them." The Bible% BOSTON: J. E. TILTON AND COMPANY. 1867. Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year i866, by J. E. TILTON & CO., In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. ^%}1 d Stereotyped by C. J. Peters & Son, 13 Washington St., Boston. Geo. C. Rand & Aveky, Cornhill Press. UD ! O ^ To THE Memory of Him, -J) ./ O NOW NO MORE, ^^P TO WHOM THE "LETTERS" OF THIS WORK WERE ORIGINALLY ^ ADDRESSED ; WHO, BORN OF EQUAL NORTHERN AND ^ SOUTHERN PARENTAGE, PASSED THE EQUAL HALF OF HIS SHORT LIFE AT THE SOUTH AND AT THE NORTH,- Hav BEING WARMLY ATTACHED TO THE SUNNY REGIONS OF THE FORMER, WHILE EQUALLY ENJOYING* THE PRIVILEGES AND ENTERPRISE OF THE LATTER, AND COMBINING IN HIMSELF WARM, GENIAL, AND WINNING QUALITIES, WITH INDUSTRY AND TALENT OF A HIGH ORDER OF CULTIVATION, MADE HIS CHARACTER BUT AN EPITOME OF WHAT SHOULD BE OUR NOBLE UNION; This Volume IS AFFECTIONATELY INSCRIBED. TO THE PUBLIC. It would hardly be necessary to prefix these few lines, were it not, that, in the undoubted quiet which will imme- diately succeed the result and decision of the late great annual elections, the title for the present volume ( " Oil on the Waters'') might be considered a misnomer, a gratuitous and superfluous effort to allay the party-s^ri/e which no longer exists. But this title was selected, the work prepared (raain- ly), and the publication designed, during the highest political excitement of the season ; and it has only been by circumstances beyond the control of the author that the latter has been delayed. This is not regretted, how- ever, as it has aiforded an opportunity to follow up the discussions instituted to their latest and most important features ; and with its original purpose, as a work of conciliation as far as might be, it will still, no doubt, come gratefully to the great political minority, and others of the country who may seem to have been politically defeated in the results of the late contest. 6 6 TO THE PUBLIC. To the Republican party this vohime is offered, as being in itself historical evidence of the original position of that party during the war, — the first half having been then written, — and contains, it is believed, but a re- flection of the true state and opinions of the loyal sections at that time. The remainder of the work but follows logically from that commencement ; and it is trusted that this exposition will clear up, to many minds, much that was misapprehended or but dimly seen. Thus to the whole country — to every section and to all parties — it is designed to appeal. The "Introduction" also should, properly, have been remodelled, or might have been dispensed with, in the more recent circumstances : but, as the volume was al- ready in type, it would have been difficult to alter the arrangement ; and it has, therefore, been allowed to remain as originally written. That this work may assist in developing and bringing to light the true principles and theory of our Government, especially in this now critical period, and that it may help to warm, sustain, and encourage the hearts and minds of many who have been laboring, as they believed, for the true welfare and interests of their country, is the highest hope and ambition of The Author. November, 1866. CONTENTS. PAGE INTRODUCTION SECTION I. LETTERS TO A NATIVE SOUTHERNER. A General View of the Causes and Principles of the War against Secession 15 SECTION II. REVIEW OF NORTHERN ARGUMENTS FOR SECESSION. First Argument. — Examination of the Declaration of Independ- ence and the Constitution of the United States 63 Secoxu Argument. — Powers reserved to the People 79 Third Argument. — WIio are the " People " ? 82 Fourth Argument. — Italy and the Italians 89 Fifth Argument. — Diiference between Revolution and Secession. The American Revolution, or Separation from Great Britain 95 Sixth Argument. — Question of " Conquest " and Military Force. . 104 Seventh Argument. — The Right, and not the Right 107 Eighth Argument. — Civil and Religious Liberty. Our Fathers. The Work of To-day 122 SECTION III. STATE RIGHTS. Mr. Davis's Theory 135 SECTION lY. Re-organization. The Present Congress 155 Arbitrary Arrests 174 7 8 CONTENTS. PAGE Martial Law 181 Emancipation 188 Re-admission of the States 195 Treason and its Penalty 207 Reconstruction 213 SECTION Y. The Great Issues of the Country 231 Platform of Congress 233 Radical Republicanism 251 The Three Rebellions 265 The Good resulting 271 Conservatism and Progress 277 A Vision of the Future 280 SECTION VI. The Present Aspect of Political Parties. The Radical Convention... 285 Points of Agreement between the President and Congress 291 The Difiference between the Executive and Congressional Party 298 The Massacre at New Orleans 311 Northern and Southern Radicalism 313 The Constitutional Amendment 318 Impartial Suffrage 325 The Civil-rights and Freedmen's-bureau Bills 337 In or Out of the Union 341 Origin of the Congressional Party ; 354 The Will of the People 379 The Issue before the People 384 " Peace " Proposals 389 Pow^ers of the Government 399 Our Republican Faith and Principles 406 The Perils of the Hour 412 The Citizen-President 431 INTRODUCTION. The great throb and thrill, of national as well as individual life frequently goes on so vigorously and energetically, that one is apt, in youth at least, to feel that such life is in itself a guaran- ty of its own existence and perpetuity ; forget- ting, oftentimes, that the outward prosperity is not the real power and impulse, but that these lie embedded in the elements and principles of life within ; and, what is more, that we must continue to recognize the principles underlying, maintain them sound and healthy at their core, and then re- gard them as the chart and compass by which we must be guided. An individual without principle is like the drift- wood brought down in our large mountain-streams, and cast hither and thither, becoming finally strand- ed wherever by chance it may have been carried. 10 INTRODUCTION. So with a nation : without a strong and permanent constitution, it must be drifted wherever events, or the shocks and wear of time, may carry it, to be left at last to ruin and decay. On the contrary, with such constitution, its principle — if high, steady, earnest — it has a perennial growth, and may look, in a healthy old age, still to send forth new and vigorous shoots of life. In order that such may be our destiny, we cer- tainly ought to tread carefully through this period of transition, — our passage from youth to early but fast-ripening manhood. We had grown hitherto with the principles in- stilled into our childhood, which were taken in by instinct, as it were, with our earliest breath, with- out — youth-like — discriminating, or investigating very closely, what these were ; our knowledge of them, rather, being general and indefinite. But, buoyant, healthful, and elastic, we felt no further need. In the mean time, as is natural with all rapid development and prosperity, there came to be latitude on all sides, and venturesome daring more or less, until we have found by experience the necessity of recurring to the real foundation elements of our existence ; and henceforth, in our INTRODUCTION. 11 maturer age, these should, undoubtedly, be more thoroughly understood and applied. It is with a view to this necessity that the fol- lowing pages are offered to the public, behoving that their simple treatment of these subjects will come home to all classes of readers. The work had its origin in the " Letters " of the first section, which were actually written at the commencement of our civil war to a young friend who was deeply interested in the course of events ; and these, or extracts from them, are here intro- duced as comprising a general view of the state of affairs at that time, and as recalling to us the sim- ple, precise platform on which we then stood. The writing was then further continued for the au- thor's own more perfect information on these great topics, believing, also, that the intehigence thus ehcited might be useful to others ; and it will be so at this time especially, it is trusted, when a mul- tiplicity of ideas has obscured, in some respects, the simple points at issue. Being exempt, by position, from party bias, the author has written with no view to party feeling or party purposes; being impelled by a simple love and duty to our country, — our whole country, as 12 INTR OD UGTION. such, — and by the sense that every citizen should do what in him lies for its true welfare and pros- perity. Now is the time, it is believed, when many of the former bonds seem loose and broken, that we ought to endeavor to establish and make perma- nent in this our favored country that happy period of republics, as it was in ancient Rome, — " Then none was for a party- Then all were for the State," — by forming one great party of the nation, that would rally around its true and simple principles ; regarding these, in our birth and history, as the providentially-given guides to our peculiar place among the nations of the earth. The writer does not presume to imply, by the title chosen for this work, that there is to be found in it a panacea for all the evils to which our coun- try has been and still is subject: on the contrary, it being one of argument mainly, there will be those, undoubtedly, who might produce opposing arguments. The name is designed simply to ex- press the calm, fraternal, and impartial mode and feeling in which it has been the aim to treat these important subjects ; believing that the work INTRODUCTION. 13 will thus commend itself to all sections of our country, notwithstanding that there has been no " compromise " offered on any of the great ques- tions of the day, any further than would seem to be warranted by strict propriety ; and no hesita- tion in using strong and decided expressions wher- ever they seemed called for. Only such treatment would be manly and honorable, and acceptable to manly and honorable readers, — those who desire sincerely to seek and to know the truth. On this ground, too, th6 author has not hesitated to speak of the wrong wherever it has appeared to exist, and to acknowledge the right wherever it has seemed to be manifested. So only, it is be- lieved, can we become reconciled and harmonious one with another ; readily acknowledging errors, even if they are our own, and willingly recogniz- ing the truth wherever it may be found. RIGHTS AND WRONGS. SECTION I. LETTERS TO A NATIVE SOUTHERNER ; BEING A GENERAL VIEW OF AFFAIRS AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE WAR. . . . Naturally, you are warmly attached to the land of your birth, and will ever, perhaps, experi- ence a sentiment in regard to it that you may not possess for any other portion of our country. We have dear relatives living there ; and so have innumerable Northern families friends or relations in the Southern States. For myself, I have no other personal feeling than that of tender affection and interest for every part of the South equally with the North; and I think I may speak for the thousands who are thus situated, certainly for those Avitli whom I am here acquainted. 16 16 RIGHTS AND WRONGS I cannot call up in myself a single feeling of partiality for one State over another, as a State, — not even in favor of that of my birth; which, also, is to me now but one of the great whole, since my greatest privileges and interests have been elsewhere. The only exception in regard to peculiar attachment is that in which I now live as 7ny home,, not as a State. But naturally, where one's home and personal interests are, one's affections must be closely centred. You yourself undoubtedly prefer , because there is your home, and your particular interests are there ; and, wherever this is the case, — yours, mine, or any one's, in one State or another, — there must be an individual, private feeling, predominating over that for any other place. But in regard to the country as a country, our whole country, I can truly say that I know no dif- ference or any partiality for one portion of it more than another. My heart never throbs for one particular sec- tion. North or South. I never think of looking upon these with sectional interest. It never occurred to me, until these late differences brought it so palpably to light, that there was a division. I had thought of the United States but as our one, united country ; and it OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 17 seemed to me a noble thing, our embracing under one government so vast a diversity of climate, soil, and resources. I have ever looked with pride upon the South, as the blooming, luxuriant garden of our land, never feel- ing for a moment that I, or any one, had not a claim and interest there as well as the Southerners themselves ; and I was disappointed that the English prince,* durino- his visit here, should not have seen that rich and glori- ous portion of our country, — glo'rious in the exuber- ance of its soil, and so rich in its natural productions. I have often, myself, looked forward to the time when I should enjoy this favored sunny clime ; not as sl foreigner^ but as a citizen ; not as a privilege, but as my birthright, — the birthright of any citizen of the United States. It is this habit of looking upon our country as an inseparable whole, not being able to divest one part of it of the character and responsibilities of another portion, that has made so sensitive much of the Northern mind on the subject of slavery. And owing to this, too, it w^as, that to myself and to other travellers when abroad (being enabled by distance to view our * The visit of the Prince of Wales occurred in the autumn pre- ceding. 18 RIGHTS AND WRONGS native land more distinctly as a unit, and as a unit only) the fact of slavery loomed up like a dark blot on our virgin territory, which should lie so fresh and fair in this New Western World, separated from all that had ever stained the history of the past in the Old. It is common to say that Northerners do not under- stand the " institution of the South ; " but if the South, from nearness to it, see it only on the more favorable side, the North, by being able to view it from a dis- tance, is more qualified to behold the dark side of it. To say there was no dark side, would be simply igno- rance ; or, worse, falsity. The dark side is not only in regard to the Africans, but in the demoralizing effect that slavery must inevitably have upon the whites. It would be in vain to assert, in defiance of our knowledge of human nature, that the whites would not oftentimes be wrought up to the highest state of irritation by the provocations of dull and inefficient slaves, — as thou- sands of them must be, — even if this were the worst. I do not mean, nor does any one mean, to say that there have not been kind and excellent masters, and good and well-conducted slaves : there have been, no doubt, thousands of the one and the other. But, with all the OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 19 good that, might be brought forward, the counter-bal- ancing evils are so many and so great, that it seems remarkable that any person could be found, removed from its immediate influences, and able to judge im- partially, who should for a moment uphold slavery. Not that I consider the people of the South themselves so highly responsible in this great evil. It had de- scended to them, and it is not to be wondered at that they should not have found any means of ridding them- selves of it. It is a difficult thing, often, to abandon even an old worn garment that we have become accus- tomed to ; and we had rather a thousand times, for ease and comfort's sake, wear it, than put on a new one. It is a natural feeling of attachment which we acquire : how much more, then, must the people at the South dread to let go that with which they, and even their ancestors, have had all their lifetime living associa- tions and a daily interest ! I do not, thus, in the least wonder at the persistency with which they have clung to slavery, appalling as it must be in many of its fea- tures to some of the most reflective among them. That we should not blame those who are thus born to evils that they know not how to avoid, or who, by cus- ^0 RIGHTS AND WRONGS torn, are so familiar with them, that they do not seem to them such, is natural ; and every exculpation should be allowed as far as possible. But that those, as I have already said, who do not occupy the same standpoint by custom or necessity, and who must know all the political as well as moral evils and wrongs of slavery, should yet defend and advocate it in these States, or anywhere else, is, to say the least, a very different matter. Nevertheless, this subject has been to our country, in every way, a great and perplexing question. Being so great, and affecting in its measure and in its influences the country as a whole, the North could not but be in- terested in it as well as the South, and sensitive with regard to it ; although but very few, comparatively, would have made efforts to agitate the subject, feeling that it was one for the particular States themselves to deal with. And because it was so perplexing a ques- tion — as to what should be done with, or what would become of, the negroes, &c. — was one reason, no doubt, why the South was reluctant to do any thing about it. To my mind, no effectual movement with regard to slavery could have been made but by the Southern OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 21 States themselves, unless some genius or other, elsewhere, had been able to make some proposition that should have been to them feasible and acceptable ; for the Con- stitution guaranteed to the South non-interference v^ith the system, as with all other State institutions. Be- sides, it is in the order of things that they who possess any thing may renounce it or not, as they please, or as they honestly think proper. No one could compel them where the holding or the renouncing did not infringe upon that other's rights.* Therefore, undoubtedly, the Government, standing between the North and South, would still protect the latter in her own political rights a hundred years hence, as it had always done, unless^ in the mean time, the Constitution were altered on that point ; for we could have no eitecutive magistracy, that, in the short space of four years, could violate that Con- stitution with impunity. The enlightened sense and the sensitiveness of the whole community on such a point would be too great : a revolution is in the hands of the people every four years to remove such a one from office, and put another in his stead. Therefore, as far * Of course, allusion is here made simply to civil and political rights. 22 RIGHTS AND WRONGS as the National Administration is concerned, the Con- stitution must and would be carried out ; and it would be left to the States forever to manage their own system of slavery, unless^ as was said before, the Constitution should be amended on that point. No change in slavery could have been effected, therefore, from that quarter (excepting always in the event of such change or "amendment" of the Constitution): and as the South never had made any movement towards that end ; and as the difficulties in the way were continually be- coming greater ; and as, from the immense sacrifice of property it would involve, it was hardly to be looked for that the Southern States should take any steps towards emancipation ; and as, in fact, their purpose seemed evident to try to invigorate the system rather than to diminish it,* — there appeared to be no prospect of any voluntary or peaceable discontinuance of it. Yet, at the same time, the sentiment of all civilization was but becoming stronger and stronger against it. Its inju- * It was not only the effort of the South to extend slavery into the Territories, but also so to amend the Constitution as to allow of its passing into and establishing itself in any of the States. — See Debates in Congress of 1860, 1861. OF THE NORTH AND 80UTH. 23 rious effects, both moral and political, were constantly becoming more obvious ; and any solution of the diffi- culty could only become, apparently, more and more hopeless. At this juncture, while men's hands were tied, as it were, on every side, voluntarily or involuntarily, a new , force suddenly came in, and that from the very South itself, to give a new phase to affairs, namely, that of absolute resistance to the National Government, and from this very cause, — slavery ; which it (the Govern- ment) had ever protected to the very limits of the Con- stitution, because that Constitution gave to the States the right to be so protected. This state of affairs was wholly unexpected. No man dreamed of the present condition of the country, and certainly no one ever planned the events that have so dramatically succeeded one another. This new current, new influence, brought in, must, un- doubtedly, change the whole complexion of affairs ; since they could hardly be supposed to remain the same after this upheaval as before. And, if a settlement in the Union be the end, some new legislation in regard to | slavery must take place in order to put the subject at 24 RIGHTS AND WRONGS rest in one way or another ; for, most assuredly, we could nevermore look for peace in respect of it on the same footing as formerly, since the i^sue that has now been made, not on the part of the Government, — which constitutionally had ever protected slavery, or, at least, had given to it its rights, — but on the part of the South- ern States themselves, who chose to make this issue. We cannot but believe that Providence is thus working out, unexpectedly to us, what no man or men have ever been able to do ; and that, eventually, the whole South, as well as the North, will be thankful if they shall he disburdened in any practicable way of their " peculiar" institution ; its -peculiarity making it so difficult to har- monize the different portions of the nation, — such a difference of habits and institutions preventing assimi- lation. I should indeed feel for the people of the South in their being stripped of what is to them property. Person- ally, I have attached no particle of blame to them for keeping their slaves, if they did not see it their duty to let them go ; but when they attempted to extend their system over places as yet untainted, and over which they had no peculiar right, I did feel that every individual in OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 25 the country, who, unswayed by custom, by attachment or interest, could see all that political and moral evil, should stand up in his utmost right and might to defend such Territories from that tamt until they should have the power (in becoming States) to say whether or not they would adopt the system. And this was exactly the state of things ; this was the one question at issue. And the same moral right — right of freedom of opinion — that the South had to advocate the extension of slavery, carrying it into the free Territories, the North had to resist such extension ; and, if it felt that this was mor- ally and politically wrong, it could only rise with, every fibre of its being against the equal exertions of the South in its favor. This was but just, and the only justice, — that those innocent Territories might he left to their own choice when they should he admitted to he States., and not be fettered beforehand with a system under which they might groan ever after. For this the North had a right ; not to " dictate," — that she could never do ; she had no right to do so ; and the instinctive sense of the commu- nity would be aroused against any portion of the country " dictating " to another portion, — but to contend by speech, by discussion, by any lawful means in her power. 26 RIGHTS AND WRONGS She had a right also, on other grounds, to maintain, with all the energy possible and needful, that the South should not carry into the public Territories a peculiarity which the North had nOtliing to balance with ; for free labor in this country has not been on a political level with slave labor. Slaves are both labor-machinery and votes in one: Avhereas the free man is a vote ; but the machinery with which he works is separate. His me- chanical labor is not represented as the slaveholder's is ; and there could be no justice in the Southern emigrants or residents having their labor represented by a vote in Congress, and the Northerners not. This " right," how- ever, the North had not much insisted upon, although it is certainly a very prominent one. Her view was more particularly to the future welfare of the Territories when they should become States ; and in this we think the whole outside world would, in general, take part with her. This was a question (whether slavery should be car- ried into the Territories) for the people at large to decide ; and when put to the vote, as it Avas, in effect, by the Chicago Platform which nominated Mr. Lincoln, an overwhelming majority, in tlie election of that presi- OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. %1 dent, decided for the position taken by the Northern and Western States. In such a case, under our system, or under any representative government, there would be nothing left for the party which had failed in its choice but to acquiesce until another election should give it an opportunity, if possible, of reversing the decision. Was such the course of the Southern vStates? Did they calmly and dispassionately yield to the acknowledged principle of our institutions, of our National Govern- ment, to which the South was as much pledged as the North, — the principle that the majority must de- cide? On the contrary, did they not, even before the election took place, begin to repudiate that fundamental principle on which the very Government was formed, and declare, that, if such should be the vote of the major- ity, they would not submit? — which rebellion, if suc- cessful, must necessarily overturn the whole constitution of things. The want of a "popular majority" in the election of Mr. Lincoln is spoken of. The majority by electoral votes, which alone is required by the Constitution, was overwhelming. The popular vote for his predecessor, Mr. Buchanan, was very much less than that for Mr. 28 RIGHTS AND WRONGS Lincoln ; and, in that contest, the opposing candidate (Gen. F'remont) was undoubtedly the choice of the Northern people. But did they dream of seceding because a Southeru president was elected ? or admit the thought that his administration was not binding upon them after he w^as constitutionally elected, because such election was not pleasing to them ? They waited pa- tiently until the presidential term was over ; and then it was not unnatural that they should be pleased to have their turn in the national councils, which had remained in the hands of the South for so many years. They are not able now, however, it seems, to pass this term in peace, but are compelled to spend it in maintaining the very existence of our institutions. Is there, then, no sacredness in governments? Should any government in the world, regularly organized by the will of the people, be thus lightly regarded, broken up, and destroyed, against the will of a constitutionally established majority, by any portion of the people, on such grounds, — that the minority could not carry their point? What the defeated party had resolved upon before the election they carried into effect immediately after, without pausing to see what course was to be OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. ' 29 pursued by the new administration. What should they have done but discuss the matter in full congress of the people? and, with the strong feeling at the South, who knows but that, possibly, a majority might have been obtained for a peaceable separation? But, in their precipitation, no opportunity was given for any such consideration of the subject ; and thus, by force^ was violated the sacred compact of government. It is well known that the Federal Government had in every way refrained from violence ; that it was the seceding States that fired upon an unarmed vessel,* employed by the Government ; Avhich shot was not returned by the Gov- ernment. It was the seceding States also, that, with seven thousand troops, assailed an almost uugarrisoned fortress-l It is well known, too, that the National Ad- ministration disavowed any intention of retaliation for this assault upon its property, but placed itself in an attitude of defence, and of legal, constitutional authority. The South maintains that it was provoked or incited to this by the Government persisting in retaining property situated within its borders. | Most truly : for in no pos- * Star of the West. t Fort Sumter. X The Constitution provides for the national property — forts, &c. — being dispersed among the several States. 30 RIGHTS AND WRONGS sible way, on any principle of the Federal Government, could it give up, on demand of any State whatever, the national property, which belonged to the whole people ; not even to sell it, unless that people by its united vote relinquished its claim to it. The opportunity to do this (by peaceful deliberation) had never been given ; and there was nothing, therefore, for the President to do, but to remain firm to the Constitution, which he had sworn not to break or alter, but to support. . . . That the Southerners themselves, many of them, believe that they are engaged in a "holy" war, there cannot be the least doubt : for, unquestionably, there is the same proportion of earnestness and sincerity among them as elsewhere ; though we believe that attachment to their "peculiar institution" has often blinded them to many things. A war, then, for " freedom of opin- ion," or for " rights," on their side, as far as it was honestly believed in, would not be deemed by them " vile." Nor would the same war carried on by those at the North for equal rights and freedom of opinion be deemed " vile," it is to be trusted, by any soul within its borders : on the contrary, war, when it comes inevitably, and is waged to maintain law, order, OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 31 and the rights of humanity, is not only not vile^ it is ^' glorious^" as every contest for the right is glorious, whenever needful. It certainly is to be deprecated, if it can be avoided ; but, if forced upon a people, there is nought to do but for every individual to rise to the rescue. Nor are we to suppose that this war would be deemed " vile " by any portion of the enlightened world abroad. We are not to imagine that England would declare her- self on the side of slavery. Her foot has been broadly placed on the ground of freedom in her own history, never, we believe, to be taken back. Would it be possible for France, after what she has done for Italy in the face of the world, to retract by declaring for the prin- ciples now manifested by the South in their declaration? Even were not slavery concerned, France would not so readily acknowledge the right of subversion of an organ- ized government by the forcible will of a minority of the people. And could we suppose that Russia, after her struo-nrle to free her own serfs at an immense sacri- fice of wealth, would now fraternize with a confederacy whose avowed strongest principle was African slavery? If the United States should eventually acknowledge such 32 RIGHTS AND WRONGS a confederacy, undoubtedly every one of those powers would do the same ; but, should such an event necessa- rily take place, I fully believe it would be to the regret and disappointment of all the better part of Europe, which, although monarchical, is looking with interest and hope to see our Government prosperously carried out.* . . . We have been accustomed freely to use the ex- pressions, "North" and "South," as if the question were simply between these tAvo sections ; but assuredly this is an error, and conceals the true issues of the war. It is necessary to make a distinction of the National Government per se ; for the question is between a jpart of the country and it. The other part happens to be for that Government ; but it might have been the reverse. It might have been, from some cause, — as when, a few years ago, the spirit of disunion was so rife among a cer- tain class at the North, — it might have been the North- ern States that had rebelled. The South now secedes for * Notwithstanding the seemingly opposite course taken, to a great extent, in Europe, during tlie American struggle, the author has no disposition to recall the above remarks, believing that they express but the real and better self of Europe in its truly great and good minds, who, for the benefit and improvement of the world and human- ity, regarded with tender solicitude and hope the " experiment " which was being carried out upon these shores. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH, 33 the sake of slavery, to have power over its own institu- tion ; but, had "disunion" prevailed, the North would have seceded to become rid of slavery. But the principles with regard to the Government remain the same in either case : the contest would have been against it. We should know, therefore, no "North" or " South." Such distinction in the conflict could only arise from their nat- ural situation. There are secessionists, no doubt, in the Northern section, though loyal men predominate ; and there are loyal men at the South, where secessionists predominate. The Administration, which is the repre- sentative of the Constitution, must act against these latter wherever they may be found ; and the former, in whatever part of the country they may happen to be, will go for the National Administration. In such a con- test, therefore, one should side with the " North" or the "South" but from principle. If, with a clear con- science, and an honest intelligence of all that has hap- pened, and a just idea of the real question, he sides with secession, then only can he be justified in going for it, and not because he is a native Southerner. And so with the Northerner : he is not justified in going with the Administration merely because he lives at the North, 3 34 RIGHTS AND WRONGS where a majority of the people support it ; because, as has been akeady said, the war is not one, rightly, of rival sections^ but between a portion of the nation and the lawful and organized government of the land. To say that the South, or any other portion of the country, has an intrinsic right to secede, appears to me simply irrational ; for such must be the very principle of disin- tegration of all government whatever. Either the idea itself of a fixed government must be given up, or, when regularly organized, it must be binding (else it is a sol- emn farce) , unless by the general consent it be dissolved. No people, in deliberately forming a constitution, does so with other than a serious and an earnest intention, and with the design that it should be permanent unless speci- fied to the contrary. The State of New York brought up this very point, wishing to join the Union with the privilege of leaving it if she desired ; but this was not assented to, and she was obliged, like all the others, to come in unconditionally. In our very Constitution and original Union, therefore, is a distinct individuality and independence above any single State or States ; and this individuality and innate independence (marked in many other relations also) constitute our "National Govern- ment," or the essential principle of it at least. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 36 There can, therefore, be no independent right of seces- sion ; and, if Southern politicians and statesmen assume a " right," it can only be, consequently, a right of revolu- tion, which, of course, any people, or part of a people, must possess with justifiable cause. Our form of govern- ment puts that peaceably and legally into the hands of the people every four years, as far as an administration is concerned (and there is ample provision for the amend- ment or re-forming of the Constitution itself when the nation may deem it necessary) ; so that an obno?:ious administration may be removed, if the people so choose : and, unless such legal course were obstructed, it would seem that there could be no cause among us for so seri- ous a resort as to arms. This is why a civil war here, like the present, has a very different aspect from any that has taken place in any other country. The civil wars of Rome were not, in the time of the republic, between the government and its constituents the people, but between rival factions, of which one, in general, had just the same right to the supreme power as another.* The very element of the * It is true, that, in the war between Pompey and Julius Cgesar, the cause of the former was ostensibly that of the government; but, 56 RIGHTS AND WRONGS jonsular power — two equal heads — laid them open ,0 this danger ; and the authority, at the best, was never so defined but that any man might overstep it : conse- quently, there Avould be frequent struggle and re-action, ^nd, when the government became consolidated by Augustus CaBsar, it could not remain permanently so, ilthough it continued for a long time, because it was 30wer assumed, and not delegated by the nation, and was jeyond bounds, and which, in the succeeding rulers, inally led to a dissolution of the empire. In England and France, the revolutions have been oc- casioned by the degeneracy, or want of integrity or of enlightenment, of the successive kings themselves at the bead of those nations. These, in the long habit of reign- ing, forgot the rights of the people, and were faithless to them, while over-grasping for their own. The people succeeded in obtaining the mastery for a time in both cases : but, in each of those countries, events proved, and unquestionably, personal rivalry had much to do with his efforts to obtain the ascendency. In that, too, between Mark Antony and Octavius on one side, and Brutus and Cassius on the other, — this being but a continuation of the struggle of Pompey and Csesar, — Brutus and Cassius were on the side of the countrj-, but were able to do scarcely more than defend themselves against the personal rivalry of their opponents. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH, 37 the verdict of the nation was, that that also was a usur- pation ; and the original government was at length re- stored. At this day, no people in the world is more loyal than that of England to that same kingly govern- ment, with the succession even on the same old plan. The difficulty was, that neither the prerogatives of the monarch nor of the people were accurately defined, and the one was always encroaching upon the other. In the course of time and experience, they have found more and more, on either side, the necessity of precise limitations, and have gradually formed them ; so that they now know better where they stand, both rulers and ruled : and there could not, probably, be a rebellion^* — the common sense of the people being against it, — unless there were really oppression and injustice, or an actual belief that there was. In France, it has been the same. The people, after * The case of Ireland may seem exceptional. Although by natural situation a sister island, which might be supposed destined to form with England but one kingdom, its population being of a different race, and having an essentially different system of religion, it may long remain antagonistic. And, whatever the truth of the case may be, it undoubt- edly believes itself oppressed, and therefore endeavors to become inde- pendent ; and, from having been originally a conquered pi-ovince, it no doubt must have this right of revolution. 38 RIGHTS AND WRONGS repeated trials of kings, &c., formed a constitution, and chose a president ; but that people, by vote (although led, perhaps, by the powerful influence of the man), raised that president, at length, to the old sovereign power. But the Emperor Napoleon well knows, that, at this day, it would not be submitted to that the whole of sovereign power should be in the hands of the governor, or mon- arch. The same spirit that broke out in the revolution of '93 would again burst forth ; and therefore gradually, step by step, he defines and makes obvious the preroga- tives of the people also. It is not that the principle of government, in either of those cases, was destroyed. It remained through all the successive changes, even through anarchy and confusion, and always, in the end, prominently triumphed ; and in both of those instances it has come hack to its original monarchical form, but with this improvement, — that the rights of the people are more known and acknowledged. Therefore those governments may probably be considered to-day stronger than they ever were, simply because that necessary counterpart of government, the people, is more recognized : that is, the power is more equalized, more OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 39 fairly divided ; the rights of both the governor and the governed being more understood and conceded. In this country, our original position was different. All was made precise and definite at the beginning, on both sides ; so that there can be no real encroachments that may not be readily and peaceably rectified ; and where all are politicians, and alive to their rights, any usurpation must be quickly perceived. Hence we can have no tyrants here, nor any mal-administration, for any length of time, guarded and restricted as we are. Our revolution is at the polls, and may be had every four years if necessary. It is but a short time to wait, even should the whole country desire a change ; thus making a necessary resort to arms impossible : for, whatever was really and essentially right, the general sense of the com- munity would sooner or later guarantee to any portion of it, without the need of fighting for it. A civil strife here, therefore, by force of arms, ought not to have been a sine qua non, an experience which Ave " must necessarily have" as well as others. There is no doubt, however, that it will be of essential benefit, show- ing just what the National Government is, and where it needs amending, if at all ; and putting to the test the gen- 40 RIGHTS AND WRONGS iiine character of the people, whether we are one disci- plined with law and loyalty in our breasts, or are swayed by impulse and capriciousness. It will try many men's souls ; for in our almost complete freedom from all out- ward restraint heretofore, as far as government is con- cerned, because it has not often been obliged to enforce political law, the sentiment has no doubt gained ground with very many, that we were, practically, not to be "subjected" to any "government," as such; that "our government" is, as it were, no government. Not only "Young America," but a vast proportion of our people, has undoubtedly had the habit of making very practical use of the doctrine " free and equal ; " overlooking in our highest officer, under the simple title of " President," any thing but the simply " equal" and private man. But we are to remember, that even our head of government is not merely "Mr. So-and-so," or " The President," acting in his individual, private responsibility, thereby making it lawful for us to give deference or not to what " he sees fit" according as tue may see fit. He, as President, is but the representative of the authorized power of the land ; and deference to him, in his official capacity, is but def- erence to that power ; and insubordination to him — to OF TUE NORTH AND SOUTH. 41 what he, in his legal authority, sees fit — is insubordina- tion to the organized law and order of the country. This habit is very much to be deprecated, as encour- aging lawlessness, and destroying all respect for authority or government, which is not only humanly, but divinely ordained in the natural constitution of things, and must be made as strong in this country, although simplified, as in any other. It has, no doubt, blinded many minds to the truth of the actual weight and necessity of an authoritative power, and has brought them, practically, to indulge the false sentiment already alluded to, — that our Republican Government is, as it were, " no government," in the usual sense of the word. This " independence" of spirit has been fostered from our very cradle * by all our habits and associations ; and * We were not a little astonished, we might say shocked, lately, in coming across a passage in a book of nursery tales, with these political allusions : — " Mrs. Greenhorn's twins, poor afflicted toads ! . . . James Boocan- non Greenhorn, the eldest, . . . face turned the wrong way, and unfortunately no eyes in the back of his head to see what people were doing. And his other brother, . . . you'll cry harder when you hear about Stephen Doublus Greenhorn, — that's the other one, . . . has got what 1= called the . . . prcsidentum complaint. . . . 42 RIGHTS AIsiD WRONGS it is, no doubt, as erroneous a spirit as any that can be cherished. The instinct of the need of government is as obviously implanted in the original, unbiassed constitu- tion of man, as any other of his instincts. All history, and the very existence of society, with its multifarious wants and passions, declare the need of a central, order- arranging power ; and such cannot be disregarded with impunity. ... It is this power, then, in the legal right and capacity which are inherent in its very nature as the Central and Federal Government, to which alone we must look for moving constitutionally and responsibly in these public affairs. The people, individually, have no authority to move hand or foot : they are as much bound by systema- " ' How are you going to cure him? ' " " ' Oh ! cut his head off! It's the only way.' " Is this the temper with which we are to imbue not only our now innocent children, but our future politicians and statesmen? May we not attribute much of the personal invective and abuse which so often disfigures even our national councils to this not only crude and irrev- erent, but harsh, disdainful, and unfeeling spirit which is thus taken in with our infant breath, and grows with all that fosters it in our maturer years? What parent would not shrink from instillmg such germs of evil, such a spirit of sarcasm, and incitements to crime, even, in the infant hearts of his offspring? Verily, our juvenile lit- erature needs reforming. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 43 tized order and by law as if they were verily chained and fettered. Nevertheless, private and individual feel- ing will constantly break forth, manifesting itself so and so. It is human nature thus to follow its own quick im- pulses, instead of what is simply right and lawful ; and in thousands of instances, undoubtedly, both at the North and the South, narrow-mindedness or ignorance will regard this as a personal conflict of animosity and hos- tility of one section against another. Were this the truth, it would be but a civil war of force, without prin- ciple on either side ; and the one must conquer who can. One would have the same right as the other. But, amidst all this personal excitement, we must not forget the great fact underlying, — that it is a contest between the people, or a portion of the people, and the Govern- ment. This was the issue taken by the Southern States, — withdrawing from the Government^ peaceably if they could, forcibly if necessary. I have before admitted a lawful right of revolution with sufficient cause. Granted to the Southern States, therefore, the right of resorting to arms, had they in this case justifiable cause? This was not misgovcrnment (which would seem to be the only thing to justify a 44 RIGHTS AND WRONGS nation, or part of a nation, in going to war) ; for they did not wait to ascertain what course the new administration would pursue, the movement commencing at the moment it was known that there would be a new administration, having been planned as soon as such administration had begun to be talked of. It was not, therefore, from any actual cause of tyranny or oppression, which would, un- doubtedly, have dignified such movement with the name of " revolution," but without aggression on the part of the Government ; and, being voluntarily engaged in, it could only be insurrection or rebellion. In such case, of course, the National Government, in its innate power over and above any portion of the country whatever, stands upon its dignity, its responsibility. It has its rights and functions to maintain ; and these it must main- tain, unless it allow the balance of power to be destroyed, and the inorganic populace to obtain more than its due ; whence disorder and anarchy must necessarily prevail. And this would be the case if such rebellion were success- ful (the principle of authority of government being broken) ; and then the National Government must succumb. But as the principle of right must eventu- ally, even in human affairs, be recognized, we cannot OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 45 suppose that the usurpation of the " people," or populace, would remain permanent, any more than the usurpation of a tyrant, but that, sooner or later, a counter-revolution would take place to right things again; and then we mi"-ht look to be broudit back, as was the case both in England and France, to the very same form or system we had formerly had ; namely, with the equal rights of both ruler and ruled : as all experience and philosophy make it more and more evident that such is the juste milieu^ the only true and wise relation between the governed and the governing, the people and the admin- istrative power ; .rights, not the same, not identical, but equalized. . . . That the true issue was this, — between a portion of the people as such and the Government, — and not as a "revolution of States," is obvious: otherwise, av hat would become of the Unionists at the South ? Are they to be merged as " rebels " and " revolutionists " ? This is very marked in the cases of Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, and Tennessee,* where the Unionists are, in number, on a par, at least, with the Secessionists. Are tlieij^ although multitudes of their citizens are in arms, * Tennessee had not then joined the Confederated States. 46 RIGHTS AND WRONGS to be put down by conquest^ as rebellious or revolutionary States?* (for, where it is a simple case of revolution and subjugation, of course the stronger and victorious power treats the#other as conquered property.) What is true in regard to those States must be true in regard to every State. We are all precisely in the same natural relation to the Federal Union ; the only diflference in the actual status of those border States and the other Southern States being, that, in the latter, the spirit of secession was more universal, and obtained more dominant sway for the time. . . , As to the question of '•' subjugation'^ of the States, I maintain, that, with our present system of government, this is impossible. Were there the right of this, of course there would be an equal right, on the part of the State, to resist ; for neither in nature or philosophy * We, in our more undisturbed regions of the North and East, could scarcely imagine tlie death-throes with which some of these border States — as Kentucky and Missouri — were threatened ; or the ardor with which they threw themselves into the contest, striving hand to hand and inch by inch for their own lawful self-possession. Theirs was the brunt of the battle. They were fighting literally for their firesides and their homes; their very political existence even. The conflict in these States shows the true nature of the insurrec- tion, — that it was by a faction of the people. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 47 is the right to suhjugate granted, without the counter- balancinii: riii-ht ou the other side to resist. The tri- umph in such a case could only be from the greater power of the one or the other, which is the principle of a foreign war, — that between two independent States, — the one holds who can. With what propriety could one be called a " rebel," if he had the right to resist, and defend himself? As it is, the Government does not claim to go against the States, as such, to interfere with any private individ- ual State right : Mr. Lincoln has always disclaimed any such intention. There is simply the right of putting down the rebellion in those States, leaving the structure of the States as before. In this way, and in this way only, could it be that Mr. Davis and the other senators who withdrew from Congress, not by resigning their seats, and becoming discharged, as public functionaries, from the oath to support the National Constitution, which they took on entering, but to carry out their purpose of secession, with the oath still upon them, — in this way only could they be considered " traitors," and not simply revolu- tionists, with all the rights of such. 48 RIGHTS AND WRONGS The South resents the idea of being conquered, sub- jugated : but it appears to me there are only these two alternatives, — either this is a rebellion of a portion of the country, and requires to be treated as such ; or it is a revolution of States^ and must therefore submit to the chances of war, to be " conquered," or not, as may happen. In the latter case, they could, of course, retain no " private, individual right " as States, but must be treated as the conquerors may see fit. Neither, in that case, could their sons be regarded as "rebels" or " traitors," having exercised simply the right of revolu- tion ; which, of course, as was said before, States must have with justifiable cause. It is the same with regard to political parties. As to confounding the or any other party as such with the sentiments and course of the Administration, guarded and guided as this must or should be by the definite Constitution of the country and the deliberate legislation of the people, we ought as soon to think of any other impossible thing. We ought not, then, to apprehend, or have ground to suspect, any " dark, politi- cal plot " underlying any of its movements, or that it is governed by a " party," any more than it is governed OF THE NOBTU AND SOUTH. 49 by a " section." Both the Executive and Congress, in their integrity, stand for the whole, and not for a part, of the country. ... Thus far, the Federal Government has conducted itself in a Christian and an honorable manner. It has shown itself, on every point, calm, conciliating, and for- bearing. Witness the proclamations after the taking possession of Baltimore and Alexandria : nothing could be more protective and re-assuring to peaceful inhabit- ants. Were the Government weak, and destitute of means for carrying on its own proper measures, very probably so many States congregated would be success- ful in accomplishing whatever they designed ; and then, indeed, we might be broken into two separate communi- ties (or as many more as we should choose to make of ourselves). But notwithstanding that strength of num- bers might, for a time, give them success, the principle would remain the same as if one State alone had at- tempted to rebel or "nullify." We know that nullifica- tion has been tried heretofore, and has always been denounced as unconstitutional. The great fact to prove the strength of our National Government, and which we cannot but expect will 4 60 RIGHTS AND WRONGS bring it iu the end to perfect success, is the manner in which it has been rallied to as the popular force ; and in this strength, if it sees it necessary, in order to main- tain its authorities and responsibilities, it will not hesi- tate to go east, west, north, or south, into any and every corner of the Union, by its own inherent right, not for the purpose of "interfering" with the rights of any State, but in the right and necessity which belong to it from its very nature as the Central or Federal Gov- ernment, and which right cannot be violently wrested from it by any one State or by several States. A majority alone could by right of force break up this central or federal authority ; and that would be revo- lution, to which, of course, the people have a right, with any justifiable cause. But in this case, although the States were numerous, the attitude was not one of right revolution, since there could be shown no justifia- ble cause ; and the ordinances of secession were not in general submitted to the people, even of the seceding States themselves. It was, therefore, an attitude of rebellion, which justifies the National Administration not only in acting on the defensive, and resisting the encroachments of the new force, but also in attacking and invading wherever and whenever it may be necessary. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 61 In this same manner, too, standing in the midst in its own dignity, truth, and uprightness, it will, no doubt, put down whatever is " ultra" (in an opprobrious sense) that may appear on any side. This war has brought out a very remarkable feature, (one nation as we have always been) ; namely, the emphatically placing an individual State above the whole country, — the lesser before the greater ; re- quiring that the State, and not the nation, should demand our preference. This appears to me on the same parallel with the being loyal to one's town or city in preference to the State. True, there are certain rights belonging to the States ; but these do not conflict with those of the National Gov- ernment ; and the latter are to be equally regarded with the former, unless there were really injustice and oppres- sion exercised by that government. The South, indeed, claims, theoretically, that there has been wrong and in- justice ; but she has not been able to point to it in reference to the Federal Government.* . . . * An examination of the wrongs alleged, upon which the actual movement of secession took place, is contained in another volume of this work. 52 RIGHTS AND WRONGS. Our foundation of a glorious freedom, and the capa- bility of one self-governing republic, though as large as, or larger than, any monarchy in the Old World, is yet to rest, it is to be trusted, on a hrm and enduring basis. There will be much suffering, no doubt : but, in the end, we shall come out stronger and more prosperous than ever ; for all will have been thoroughly tested and proved. And this is what was needed. Nations as well as individuals have to go through the furnace of affliction, difficulty, and trial, to know of " what stuff, they are." I do not in the least look upon the Union as broken. There are loyal citizens in all those States ; and, when the insurrection is quelled, — " conquered," if one pleases, — the States will still remain as they were, part and parcel of one noble Government and Consti- tution. SECTION II. REVIEW OF NORTHERN ARGTOIENTS FOR SECESSION. The attempt of the secessionists to withdraw from the Union has been considered in general, by non- secessionists, as treason to the National Government : but it is well known that the great mass of Southerners have not so regarded it ; on the contrary, they have made it a matter of conscience and duty to fight for their " State Rights," as they call them, in opposition to the Federal Government. It is known, too, that the moral and religious element has been as strong and active among them as elsewhere, and that personal bravery, valor, and self-sacrifice, have been displayed equally with those qualities in any part of the country, even if they have not surpassed, them ; which, were it so, would not be surprising, inasmuch as they believed themselves fighting almost for their very existence. It is said that Gen. Stonewall Jackson spent a whole night 63 54 RIGHTS AND WRONGS in prayer before he came to a decision upon the subject ; and is it to be presumed that such a man, and many others in the same position, decided otherwise than con- scientiously when they went with the rest of their people in secession? Thus what is called treason by one part of the nation was considered patriotic duty by another. Such facts manifest a great diversity of thought and feeling, which, on either side, has amounted to convic- tion ; and, while such discrepancy of views exists, there can be no true union between the different sections. The physical powder of the Government, indeed, has been able to repress and regulate outward movements ; and increasing communication between the different parts, and growing business and prosperity, will tend to produce external peace and harmony. But to conciliate the minds of our people, and bring them again into the fraternal bonds of mutual kindliness and respect, we need to know precisely what and where is the actual truth. We need this discovery, too, for a further purpose. "We believe that our great danger as a people is not yet over ; that it may occur again and again ; and that it ^ lies in the want of a perfect apprehension of the true OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 66 elements of our republican system. Other nations have had to grope their way through great and frequent con- vulsions, because their outward limitations were not well defined. We may, in a similar manner, be liable to continued shocks and convulsions, because the inward elements of our national existence are not closely appre- hended or understood. These perils can only be avoided by a just apprehension of the great questions of the day. This of secession or non-secession comes first in the list, and thoroughly to sift and unravel it will be a step towards making clear all others. This principle in the abstract has been a development not only of one portion of our country, but of all parts of it; arising, we believe, from that innate spirit of independence and freedom which is the very character- istic of the American .people, — the rapid, luxuriant growth, as it were, of the American soil. In the cooler North, this spirit reached its climax a few years since, with but a show of flower and fruit, in the threatening and exciting cry of disunion among a certain class ; slavery, the withdrawing from slavery, being the impelling cause. It was then the part of the Southern States strongly to remonstrate, and to 56 RIGHTS AND WRONGS deprecate this voluntary severing of our national bonds. It would, undoubtedly, have been difficult to induce the mass of the Northern people, with their more calm, reflective temperament, to yield to this demand of a small but vehement party ; and probably that point (disunion) never would have been reached, the fructify- ing stimulant, slavery, not heing in the soil itself, but merely in the atmosphere. The efforts of that small party, however, were very great, and bore their fruit, undoubtedly, in another way, — in accustoming the mind of the people to the idea of separation, and tending to excite it, in the South, to that practical issue. There, in that almost tropical re- gion, and with the nourishing stimulus, slavery, on the very ground itself, the spirit of secession (only another form of disunion) came to its full and outbursting growth. The seeds were the same in one and the other section ; the warmer climate and greater fertility of the soil bringing them to fuller perfection in the one case than in the other. So true is this, that, at the commencement of the secession movement, great numbers of the Northern OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 67 people scarcely knew whether the Southerners might not be right in the ' abstract : their thought and expression on the subject were undecided. All that numerous class in the free States who have advocated specific rights of all kinds, — "Human Rights," " Woman's Rights," "Rights of Man," &c., — would, most likely, have merged themselves, in theory., on that side.* It is only the actual attempt to put this theory into execution that has revealed its difficulties, and allayed its advocacy, for the time. For the time, we say ; as we cannot believe that a root of such magnitude is made extinct by out- ward repression or circumstances merely, but that it will be ready to spring up in some modified form, on any new occasion, at the North as well as at the South. On this account it is, that an examination of this whole * " The New- York Tribune," in the first days of secession, gave utterance to the following: — " We fear that Southern madness may precipitate a bloody col- lision that all must deplore. But if even seven or eight States send agents to Washington to say, ' We want to get out of the Union,' we shall feel constrained by our devotion to human liberty, to say, ^Let them go!^ And we do not see how we could take the other side, without coming in direct conflict with those rights of man, which we hold paramount to all political arrangements, however convenient and advantageous."^ 68 RIGHTS AND WRONGS question is so necessary, that the real truth may be laid plain before us. For this, it is not necessary to search for arguments among the Southerners themselves, although they have * produced them sufficiently for their own purposes ; the Hon. John C. Calhoun of South Carolina being, it is well known, their first great apostle. We believe it is all-sufficient to examine some which have been brought forward at the North ; and we prefer so to do, as they are undoubtedly the most favorable towards se- cession that may be found, being the arguments of a (religious) party which claims for itself the most lib- eral and advanced thouojht of the a";e.* But, before we come to this discussion, we will revert to the exciting moment when this topic (in its Northern phase) was' first introduced into the national councils, and will obtain from history some outlines of the subject. * Notwithstanding these arguments for secession, it i%. but just to say, that, practically, thei-e was no party, as such, more patriotic, and more loyal to the Government during the war, than this; and that probably but few of its members may have indorsed this theory, although the pamphlet which we are going to disciiss was written by one of its leaders, reported to be a prominent Unitarian clergy- man. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 69 In the year 1842, some citizens of Haverhill, Mass., signed a petition, which they forwarded to the Hon. John Quincy Adams to present, praying Congress to " immediately take measm'es peaceably to dissolve the Union of these States." Mr. Adams, in his seat in the House of Representatives, presented the petition, and, at the same time, made a motion that it might be referred to a committee with instructions to report an answer, saying why it should not he granted. Never- theless, the excitement was intense ; and the Southern and Western members immediately took steps not only to denounce the petition, but to reprimand the repre- sentative for offering it. Resolutions were drawn up, and the next day they Avere presented by the member from Kentucky (Mr. Thomas F. Marshall). The pre- amble was in these words : — " Wliereas^ The Federal Constitution is a permanent form of government, and of perpetual obligation, until altered or modified in the mode pointed out in that instru- ment ; and the members of this House, deriving their political character and powers from the same, are sworn to support it ; and the dissolution of the Union necessarily implies the destruction of that instrument, the overthrow 60 RIGHTS AND WRONGS of the American republic, and the extinction of our na- tional existence : a proposition, therefore, to the repre- sentatives of the people, to dissolve the organic laws framed by their constituents, and to support which they are commanded by those constituents to be sworn, before they can enter into the execution of the political powers created by it and intrusted to them, is a high breach of privilege, a contempt offered to this House, a direct proposition to the Legislature, and each member of it, to commit perjury, and involving necessarily, in its execu- tion and its consequences, the destruction of our country, and the crime of high treason." They then " Resolved therefore^ That the mem- ber from Massachusetts, in presenting a petition praying for the dissolution of the Union, has offered the deepest indignity to the House of which he is a member ; an insult to the people of the United States, of which that House is the legislative organ ; and will, if this outrage be permitted to pass unrebuked and unpun- ished, have disgraced his country, through their repre- sentatives, in the eyes of the whole world. " And " Resolved further^ That , for this insult (the first of the kind ever offered to the Government), and for OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 61 the wound which he has permitted to be aimed, through his instrumentality, at the Constitution and existence of his country, the peace, the security, and liberty of the people of these States, might well be held to merit ex- pulsion from the national councils," &c. . . . At the close, Mr. Adams rose with calm dignity ; and, when replying to the charge of high treason, he said, " I call for the reading of the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. Read it ! read it ! and see what that says of the right of a people to reform, to change, and to dissolve their government." The paragraph was read, and the excitement turned.* No precise interpretation of those words of the Dec- laration were given, however, at that time ; nor were they called for. It was simply a recognition of the idea, that a people, having the need, may remodel or change their government ; and, in such a case as ours, the peace- able, legal way, undoubtedly, would be by that very form which was then introduced, — by petition, or by conven- tions, and so forth. But, to make this effective, there must be a majority of the people, of course, in such * See Memoir of John Quincy Adams. 62 RIGHTS AND WRONGS petitioning, or in meeting in convention. Mr. Adams, an ardent lover of his country, undoubtedly did not think it necessary or well to introduce this topic, and therefore, in presenting the petition, desired that the committee should be instructed to report unfavorably to it. From this history, we see with what repugnance the idea of breaking up the Union was originally received by the South, and their strong expressions of its treason- able nature. The balance has swayed round, and the North has had its turn in makinsr use of the same ex- pressions against the Southern attempt. We may thus believe that the first instinct of the people in general has been for a permanent Union. Any plausible theory being once broached, however, the mind will continue to dwell upon it, and, if possible, work it out to a logical result. Such has been the case with this theory of the dissolution of the Union. We were long familiar with the growing arguments of the Southern States for it, and we will now (as we have said) proceed to examine some which culminated at the North in its favor.* * Some of the following pages of these " arguments " were published in a few numbers of a weekly paper, — the only part of this work which has ever been in print. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 63 FIRST ARGUMENT. EXAMINATION OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. From the pamphlet* referred to on a previous page we quote : — Page 13. — " To us, it seems clear, that, according to the fundamental principles of our government, the secessionists are right in their main principle. If a State considers itself oppressed in the Union, it has a right to leave the Union peaceably. This is only affirm- ing the principles of self-government, which are asserted in the Declaration of Independence, and in almost every State Constitution. The Declaration of Independence asserts in terms, that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of the ends of government, ' it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government ; laying its foundation on such princi- ples, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.' " So too," continues the writer, " declares the Consti- tution of Massachusetts ; saying, that, ' when the objects of government are not obtained, the people have a right to alter the government.' " The Constitution of Maine says, . . . 'AH power is inherent in the people ; all free governments are founded in their authority, and instituted for their bene- * "Secession, Concession, or Self-possession: which? Boston: 1860." 64 RIGHTS AND WRONGS fit : they have, therefore, an inalienable and indefeasi- ble right to institute government, and to alter, reform, or totally change the same when their safety and happi- ness require it.' " The writer then specifies the Constitutions of most of the States, all of which declare the same thing. The correctness of this principle, — the power of the people to revise and remodel, or even wholly to alter or change, their government, with sufficient cause, — no one in a republican country will deny. But it is necessary in this argument to bear in mind, that although thus asserting, as they believed it, a general and universal principle, founded in natural rights of mankind, they were applying it (the Declaration) at that moment to the "people" of the United States; and the States, to their own particular selves as States. All of these, singly and in the mass, having been dependent colonies, but now feeling justified in holding themselves a free "people" and free "States," took to themselves the right of remodelling or creating anew their 'particular Constitutions^ and also a federative or central form of government ; each of the States, as colonies, having had a distinct and separate one before, and all of them to- gether a general one, under one monarch. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 65 But this general principle, although expressly applied to their peculiar condition at the time, as then stated, we cannot doubt would, thus recognized, become a pro- vision (whether so designed at that moment or not) in the States for them to alter or modify their Constitutions in future if they should deem it requisite, and, in the United States, for it also to re-form or modify its gov- ernment. Such an inherent "right" must, no doubt, be acknowledged in any rightly founded system. We cannot suppose, however, that any one of those new Constitutions meant to indicate in that principle, or in those " terms " laid down, that the inhabitants of any single town or any county in the State should thus revise and remodel, or alter and change, that Constitu- tion, according to its own especial ideas or purposes ; or that they were giving the right to any such town or county to abolish or throw oif that government (of the State), independently of the rest of the State. Had such an idea been theirs, it would undoubtedly have manifested itself in more explicit terms. On the con- trary, the State, in forming such Constitution, was in its people a unit, and its own author. It must undoubt- edly, therefore, be itself, the same unit, the same wliole 5 66 RIGHTS AND WRONGS people, — or a majority at least, — to re-form or re- model it. So, also, the Declaration of Independence, in the United Congress of the States, had reference only to the united people of those States ; that is, to the nation at large. We could not suppose, any more than in the case of the State Constitutions, that the authors of the Dec- laration of Independence, and of the Constitution suc- ceeding (for they are but the complement, one of the other, — what the one omits the other embraces, both together forming our political " system " ), — we could not suppose that they had in their minds — as far as those " terms," those " assertions," were designed for a future provision as occasion might demand — any idea of the citizens of any single State, independently, on their own account, abolishing or overthrowing that which belonged to, and had been declared for, all the States in general. Without doubt, they meant to imply that the power to revise, remodel, or " institute a new government," belonged to that very people, and to that only and intrinsically, which had possessed the old or former one ; and that was the united people. The Dec- laration and the Constitution belonged, not to one portion OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 67 more than another, but to each and every part of the country equally. If, then, there were an implied princi- ple that any one of the States (whose population forms but a pari of the people in general) should undertake to do that of itself independently of the others, it would be giving it, to say the least, a tremendous power of detri- ment to the general well-being ; endangering the stability of that central, undivided government to every other portion of the people, no matter how happy, satisfied, or prosperous they might be under it. We cannot con- ceive of such an element of discord and confusion — injustice even, any one State having the power thus to disturb the whole nation — having been intentionally in- troduced into the very formation of our system, and as a fundamental principle. It has been suggested that a State might "withdraw" peaceably^ and so leave the others just as they were. The " withdrawing " is and can be only a rejection of the old government, and a form- ing of a new one, which is the very principle in ques- tion ; and, whenever that once occurs as a precedent, any other of the States must be entitled to the same over- throw or rejection whenever its citizens shall deem there is " cause " for it : and henceforth ihe General 68 RIGHTS AND WRONGS Constitution, or Government, would be only a thing to be cast off, shaken as a tottering pillar, by any who might choose to do it.* Rejecting then, as impossible, the introduction of such a fundamental principle on the part of the framers of our system, who were men of intelligence and devoted patriotism, and were undeniably endeavoring to secure the good of the whole country, or of the country as a whole, to our apprehension the only simple and reasona- ble construction of those " terms," " assertions," or prin- ciples, laid down (if they were not limited to that partic- ular occasion, but were to be carried over to the use of future times, — which, of course, they being a general principle, we must naturally infer), would be, that, as the people of the "United States" in general (in Congress assembled) had the right to form, originally, their own system of government, that sa^ne people, that is, the peo- ple of the " United States " in general^ in a similar man- * Experience has already shown how, fx'omthe very first suggestions of, to the filial attempt at, "withdrawal," or "seceding," — "peace- ably " or otherwise, — the whole nation was agitated to its foundations; which agitation and alarm, pervading every quarter of the country, was, no doubt, but a warning of the injury and danger that would accrue from the actual fact itself, and which, moreover, shows how intimately all are united in one general sympathy and interest. I OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 69 ner (in Congress assembled), — not any single or partial portion of it, or in a subversive and inimical manner, — must continue to have the same right to form a new sys- tem Or mode of government if they see fit. This appears to us the natural, and only natural, deduc- tion from the principle laid down in the Declaration of Independence ; and they themselves — the actors at that time — initiated or made emphatic this simple deduc- tion, by proceeding, ten years or so afterwards, to form a new Constitution, not finding from experience the old one to be sufficient ; and they have given an example to the nation in general for similar future action, whenever it may be necessary. But, in the mean time, we are to remember the one fundamental principle of any consti- tution whatever, — that, as long as it exists unrepealed, its articles are of binding force and obligation (unless, by tacit or general consent, they become obsolete). If any statute be oppressive to even a considerable portion of the people, it must no doubt wait, in an orderly way, until a majority shall be obtained to effect the remod- elling of that statute ; for which, provision is made in the very Constitution itself. There is, therefore (as has been said in the "Letters" of the First Section), no 70 RIGHTS AND WRONGS opportunity or occasion under our system of govern- ment for a revolution of force, an appeal to arms, for the people to obtain the redress which they require, unless the minority really and obviously possessed the more legitimate cause, and a majority could not be found sufficiently disposed to do them justice. In no other way, it appears to us, could there be a justifiable revolution by arms in this country ; and any thing less than a justifiable cause must assuredly class a resort to arms with " insurrection " or " rebellion." Unless, then, our people became greatly demoralized, we had no reason to anticipate a revolution of force such as have characterized other countries, and which, indeed, was the beginning of our own national ex- istence. But we have wandered from our subject, and must return to the proposition of our author, — that any State has " a right to leave the Union peaceably," — that is, independently, — in accordance, as he infers, with that principle (the power of re-forming or re-modelling a government) laid down by the authors of the Declara- tion of Independence ; or, as he afterwards says, that their " right to go is asserted by the Declaration of OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 71 ladependeDce, and in nearly every State Constitu- tion." We maintain, as has been seen, the improbability, or we might say impossibility, of any such broad construc- tion of that principle, as simply stated, either in the State Constitutions or in the Declaration ; and that the framers of the latter were not thinking, at the moment, of applying it to any single State in distinction from the Union, is abundantly shown by the whole tenor of that instrument. The thirteen original colonies were all under one ruler, — the crowned head of England. They were in one and the same condition, each being aware of and recognizing it ; and, after long-repeated acts of oppres- sion from the mother-country, these thirteen colonies, as one, rose to resist that oppression. ^ No one can read the " declaration " signed by every one of those colonies, in which each had the same vital interest, and which was the spoken word for all, without perceiving that they were acting as one confederation, one band. Feeling themselves entitled, from their condition and the oppressive power exercised over them, to inde- pendence, and a separation from the former govern- 72 BIGHTS AND WRONGS ment of England, they style themselves at once, — no longer colonies, but States. They had all been one assemblage, under one and the same authority ; it was their normal condition : and now no change whatever was designed in their relations one with another, but the assumption of the name of " States" had reference only to their relations with England, as no longer " colonies." If there was any change in their natural condition and relation to each other as a family of sister colonies, or now States, it was only to strengthen and confirm their union. And this was indeed done in the establishing of the Continental Congress ; showing thereby, not a design of relinquishing all centralizing government, but merely of taking it from the parent country into their own hands, — the hands of this family of sister States. They allude to themselves, in the commencement of the Declaration of Independence, as " one people," to whom it had become necessary to " dissolve the political bands which had connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station" (using the word in the singular^ as of "one people") "to which the laws of Nature and of Nature's Grod entitle them." OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 73 They then proceed, for " decency's sake," to justify themselves before the Avorld ; to enumerate the causes of complaint ; and speak of the refusal of laws for the " public good ; " invasions on the rights of " the people ; " the endeavor to prevent the " population of these States" (again in the singular, as " one people") ; send- ing swarms of officers to " harass our people ; " keeping " among us " standing armies ; subjecting " ws to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitutions, and unacknowl- edged by our laws ; " plundering " our seas ; " ravaging " our coasts ; " burning " our towns ; " constraining " our fellow-citizens ... to bear arms against their coun- try " (again in the singular, as of one). "A prince whose character is thus marked ... is unfit to be the ruler of a free people " (again as one). They go on to say, not " the representatives of South Carolina, of Georgia, of Massachusetts, of New York, of New Jersey," and so on, as separated States, but "we, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, ... in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies " (still in the singular, as of one aim, one object, one people), " solemnly publish and declare that these United Colo- 74 RIGHTS AND WRONGS nies are, and of right ought to be, free and inde- pendent States ; " not free and independent of each other ^ — they are saying nothing about that, — but " that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved ; and that, as free and independent States " (in contradistinction from being dependent on England), "they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do." * Throughout the Declaration, there is not a single allu- sion to any individual State as such ; which coincident testimony of itself must condemn the assertion of our author, that the " right " of any one "to go " (or secede) is asserted by the Declaration of Independence. * It might be objected, that the continued use of the terra " States " disproves the idea of a centralizing government. It merely shows, in our opinion, the fine instinct of republican institutions which existed in the very birth of our Government. As colonies, they had been independent in their domestic functions, one of another; and they were not thinking of altering those relations, but simply of form- ing a central authority to take the place of that which they had thrown off. OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 75 Neither in the Constitution, afterwards formed, is there the least allusion to any such secession principle, or inde- pendent State's right, — the liberty to go or not, at pleasure : on the contrary, we will take from it some passages that completely militate against the idea, even, of such principles being implied. It commences speaking in the name of all, as did the Declaration : " We the people of the United States^ in order to form a more perfect union " (for the express pur- pose of making themselves perfectly one people), . . . " do ordain and establish this Constitution " (one and singular, as for one people) " for the United States of America. "The Congress" (one and general) "shall have power . . . to . . . provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States ; ... to regulate commerce . . . among the several States ; ... to exer- cise exclusive legislation., in all cases whatsoever, . . . over all places purchased by the consent of the legisla- ture of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, &c. " No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or con- 76 RIGHTS AND WRONGS federation ; grant letters of marque and reprisal ; coin money, &c. " No State shall, without the consent of Congress^ . . . keep troops, or ships of war, in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State, . . . nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the legislatures of the States concerned, as ivell as of the Congress. ... " The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion, and, on applica- tion of the legislature, . . . against domestic violence. " This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, . . . shall be the supreme law of the land " (in general ; and in the singular, as one land) ; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notivithstancling. . . . " The powers not delegated to the United States hy the Constitution^ nor prohibited hy it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 77 All the above, as well as the whole tenor of the Con- stitution, shows emphatically the paramount authority of the Constitution, of Congress, of the United States, over and above any independence of the individual States Had such government been arbitrarily imposed upon them, they would, no doubt, have the intrinsic right to rebel against it, and throw it off if they pleased, ac- cording to that fundamental principle of the Declaration of Independence which we have been examining. But that Constitution, and paramount authority, or Central Government, was voted for and confirmed by each one of those thirteen original States,* who were therefore a party to it, placing to it their hand and seal as their vol- untary work. Thus consenting and pledged, they no longer have the right to reject it, unless law is no law, and government no government, of no force and stabil- ity, and word and promise have no vital and honorable significance. The only way in which they could become rid of this constituted authority would be by the right * Every new State coming in, of course, gives the same allegiance; voting for and confirming the Constitution, and thereby becoming a party to it. 78 RIGHTS AND WRONGS of revolution ; and that, as we have seen, can only truly exist with a justifiable cause.* "We maintain therefore, after this review, that no ar- gument for secession, or that any State " has a right to go," — as is asserted by the author of our pamphlet, — can be drawn from the " terms " or principles laid down in either of the documents of our constituted government, but that, on the contrary, the whole weight of evidence is directly the other way. * That our system of government is a " national " one, and not a "confederation," or a compact between States, — besides being amply testified to, as we have seen, in the whole spirit and tenor, as well as precise expressions, of the Declaration and the Constitution, — is cor- roborated by the very pertinent paragraph (with which we were all made familiar by its going the rounds of the newspapers during the war) from a speech of Patrick Henry, showing the view taken of it by a contemporary statesman. He says, — " Have they said, ' We the States ' ? Have they made a proposal of a compact between States f If they had, this would be a confederation : it is, otherwise, most clearly a consolidated government. The whole question turns, sir, upon that poor little thing, the expression, ' We the people,^ instead of ' the States ' of America." Again: on another occasion, he asked " whether the county of Char- lotte would have any authority to dispute an obedience to the laws of Virginia; and he pronounced Virginia to be to the Union what the county of Charlotte was to her." Such emphatic explanation during that period, the period of its or- ganization, is sufficient to show the original meaning and intention of "the Union," OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH. 79 SECOND ARGUMENT. PO"