„o J V **V ^ Cv !*• V** #&• \-/ •*«"•' V*' - ^0< x -^ V k ' * ° * CV ^ '-;' >■ ^ _ «> r*. > Y ■ ,0 o ° c t ^ c • u^ ■*- o o o V \<<- ^ V <■ • t. V A j ». .+"* sum** %.. <, c .-i-^v. % .+" *(^-> V ... LETTER TO WHITEMARSH B. SEABROOK, Governor of the State of South-Carolina. DISSOLUTION OF THE UNION. SECOND EDITION. PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR. CHARLESTON, S. C. A. E. MILLER, NO. 5 BROAD-STREET, 1850. ts-fft* To His Excellency WHITEMARSH B. SEABROOK, Governor of South-Carolina : Sir, — It will not be thought presumptuous in any man respectfully to submit his opinions to your consideration, on a subject so important, as the dissolution of the Union. — Even they who have been most scrupulous in abstaining from all participation in the ordinary discussions of party politics, will need no apology for freely examining a ques- tion, in which not the success of party or persons, but the destiny of the whole country is deeply involved. It is proposed to destroy the Confederacy of the United States. The people have so long and uninterruptedly en- joyed the beneficent influences of this crowning mercy to the wisdom and virtue of our ancestors, that they no longer ap- preciate the blessing, and are in danger of testing its value by its loss. They have lived in the healthy atmosphere of peace and prosperity which it diffuses around them, as they breathe the vital air, without a thought of how essential it is to their existence. We would destroy that which all other people similarly situated are craving to possess. The best men of Italy and Germany, taught by our example, have been long laboring and hoping to obtain this great remedy for intestine dissention, and aggression from abroad. United Italy, United Germany, are the day dreams of Italian and German Patriots. To realize them, they freely peril for- tune and life. Until they can be realized, they see no hope for Italy or Germany. But we upon whom Providence has bestowed this pearl of great price, are willing to cast it away and trample it in the mire. The Statesmen of Europe, and Americans abroad, sufficiently removed from our sectional disputes, to be able to take a broad and comprehensive view of the subject, are astonished at the facility with which we would destroy what they so clearly perceive to be of value beyond all estimate. They sec from the vantage ground ol their position, what we do not, involved as we are, in the dusl and smoke of party disputation, that our Confederacy is the talisman which alone has produced the miracles of American progress, and made the United States the won- der and envy of all Nations; that without it, we should be- come the scorn and prey of the monarchies of Europe. They ask us with astonishment, what is it you propose to destroy ? Is it the Confederacy which for sixty years has secured undisturbed internal peace to a continent — which has conferred unexampled prosperity on the people of North America — which has enlarged their limits from the Missis- sippi to the Pacific Ocean, and increased the number cf their States from thirteen to thirty-one — which establishes in this immense region the same laws, gives it the same lan- guage and literature, imparts to it the blessings of unlimited free trade and unrestricted social intercourse, and enables it to carry on, in unbroken links, from State to State, every kind of internal improvement, by which that trade and inter- course may be made more profitable and easy? It is Union which has imparted to the American people, the strength and influence of a great Nation. It is Union which has made their voice potential among the strongest of the earth. It is by Union only, that we are enabled to bid defiance to all foreign aggression- from whatever quar- ter. . Who are indifferent to the advantages of the com- merce, or would lightly challenge the hostile fleets and armies of the States united? Shall we, from this con- dition, reduce ourselves to that of separate and feeble com- munities? The fables of our childhood would rebuke our rashness and teach us the strength of Union, and the weak- ness of dissention and separation. Lei as reflect on these effects of the Confederacy more minutely. To the Southern man— the advocate of free trade— what can be more imposing than the condition of a great continent more than equal in extent to all Europe, en- joying within itself, the most perfect freedom of trade and intercourse ; no duties, no passports, no hindrance of any kind. Every man goes where he pleases ; sells and buys what he pleases ; establishes his household in any State of the thirty-one, with all the rights and privileges of the native citizen of each State, without any the smallest official in- terference of police, spy, or custom-house regulations. No- thing like it exists, or nas ever existed on earth. In Europe you are stopt on the frontiers of every State. Your baggage must be rummaged, your passports vised. In every petty principality, you are exposed to the insolence and exactions of the government officials. New duties on goods, new ex- aminations of persons, new difficulties of every sort, await you at every step. What a contrast this to the unrestrained liberty of intercourse, to the unlimited freedom of trade, which the Confederacy, and the Confederacy alone, secures to the American citizen throughout his immense country. And if these effects of the Confederacy be admirable now, what will they be when the population and wealth of the country are increased a thousand fold ? Again, what can be more admirable to ever} 7 Christian man, than the unbroken internal peace which has prevailed for seventy years between the North American States — Na- tions as they are, with independent State Governments, with various interests, with feelings sometimes hostile to each other, with serious conflicts of opinion on important subjects from time to time, they have preserved and enjoyed, nevertheless, the incalculable blessings of undisturbed peace. Compare our condition with that of Europe for thelast se- venty years. Compare it with that of the South American States. Who can estimate the loss of life, of wealth, of pro- gress in every science and art of civilized life, the crimes, the sufferings which the wars of Europe have inflicted on its people in the last seventy years ? Look at the condition of the South American States, at their obscure and unintelli- ble wars, in which no one cares to ask who is victor and 8 \vix> vanquished; at the rise and fall of military despots, rivals in cruelty and rapacity, with no law but that of the sword, and no prospects of an end to the reign of bloodshed, robbery, and utter lawlessness. From these evils, nothing but the Confederacy preserves us. No man can believe that if that grand conservator of the peace were destroyed, it would be possible to prevent in this country the existence of the same violence, plunder, and bloodshed. In a short time border disputes, for which causes always exist, would arise, with lawless men to head them. The States would be in- volved in the conflicts, and ambitious demagogues would be always ready to lead, to excite, to embitter the mutual hos- tilitv. Standing Armies will be created in every State, and military despotism be established inevitably every where. Can any man doubt this who has read a page of ancient or modern history '? Greece, Italy, all countries, all ages afford lessons perpetually repeated, that cannot be misunderstood. Arc we willing to be involved in such feuds and broils as characterized the modern Italian States ? Are we content to engage in wars like those of the English Heptarchy, which Milton compares to the battles of kites and crows, as little worth a chronicle? Are we ready to exchange the rule of law and order, for that of petty military despotisms ? If we are, then abolish the Confederacy, destroy the Union, and ior peace we shall soon have wars that will be little better than murders, and rulers who will not be far removed from chiefs of banditti. In this rase, what will be your condition in relation to fo- reign countries? As a Confederacy we command the res- Mi' ;,ll governments, as unconnected States, we shall port and prey of all; as a Confederacy we can frota France or England, or any other nation ; ■II object oi* fear and apprehension to Spain ; we crushed Mexico in two campaigns; as separate States • iptible in the eyes of Portugal or itisb fleets exacting private claims as in Greece, and troops from France or England landing to adjust our quarrels, as on the banks of the Rio Plata. The commerce which now equals that of England, and exceeds that of any other nation, would be torn to pie- ces. There would.no longer be any force adequate to pro- tect it, among feeble communities, engaged in endless broils and feuds, and stript of all power except that of inflicting mutual injuries. The apparent destinies of the American people, so glorious in the past, so much more glorious in the future, would pass away like an unsubtantial vision of the night, and the great Anglo-Saxon race would mourn over the country, which they are now exulting in as the consum- mation of the power and honor of their name. But it is said we can form a great Southern Confederacy and become, more than ever, before, prosperous and power- ful. Who can tell whether, even if separated from the North, this formation of a Southern Confederacy would be practicable ? Where would it begin ? What States would it include? Certainly not Virginia, or Kentucky, or North- Carolina, or Tennessee, or Louisiana. But suppose them all willing to take counsel for the purpose, can any one be assured that they would unite in a general Southern Gov- ernment? Will there be no differences of opinion, no anta- gonist interests? We all know the difficulty with which the present Confederacy was formed, the obstacles that de- layed and almost defeated its adoption by the States after it had been laboriously shaped and settled by the Conven- tion of States. Will not the same difficulties beset the union proposed ? Why there is hardly a State in which there are not opposing interests within its own limits. Up- country and low-country, property and population, have each their staunch and sometimes bitter advocates. We all remember the hot and uncompromising disputes between West and East in the last Virginia Convention, and do we believe that in a Convention of the Southern States, suppo- sing such an one to exist, there will be nothing but the milk and honey of mutual concession and forbearance, no hostile feelings, no conflicting interests, no impracticable obstinate unyielding minds ? He that believes this, knows nothing of' men or public bodies. For my part, I firmly believe that the present Confederacy is the first and last which the coun- try will ever see. If that be destroyed, there is forthwith forever an end to confederacy in North America. This is my solemn conviction, and I forewarn our citizens of this truth. No future Confederacy can be sanctified like the present by the memories of the past; by associations with the great men and great events of the grand epoch of Ame- rican history ; by the wisdom and virtues of the Father of his Country. If this Union cannot stand, there is no hope for the continuance of any other. The spirit of impatience to confederate rule which our example will sanction and es- tablish will prevail forever. The smallest real or supposed injury or inconvenience inflicted on any one member of any future supposed Union of States, will be enough to induce that member to abandon it — to secede, to break up without scruple or remorse. They would become mere temporary partnerships, as the great English Statesman describes it, like partnerships for the sale of dry goods or groceries, to be dissolved with as little reflection, or difficulty. We see this plainly enough as far as the North is concerned. No one believes that New-England and Pennsylvania could perma- nently unite, or that any State would long endure the arro- gant and intriguing spirit of New-York. But we flatter ourselves that in the South it is different, that we have a bond of union in the institution of slavery which alone will insure our cohesion, that ive would stand united if all the world were at variance. Is the necessity of union among the Southern States any more apparent than was the necessity of union among all the States at the end of theRevo- lutionary War? They were then feeble communities exhaust- ed by a long war, without money or credit, in debt, at the mercy of England, unless they adhered to each other, and yet ft required the almost superhuman exertions of the ablest and best men of the country to persuade the States to accept the present form of government. Men are not swayed by rea- 9 son, but by passion, by prejudice, by interest, real or sup- posed, by the personal views of leaders, by the art of dema- gogues, by notions and fancies powerful, while they last, however short in duration. Will the South be exempt from these disturbing influences? Most assuredly not. Besides, is it certain that there will be no difference of opinion on the subject of slavery even in the South itself. Was there no difference in the Virginia Convention ? So long as the ques- tion concerning slavery is between the North and South, we may count on unanimity of opinion and feeling in the South- ern States, however much they may differ as to the mode of proceeding in vindicating their rights, or redressing their wrongs. But when the question is purely Southern, are we quite sure that we shall find the like unanimity? Will the mountain region agree with the coast? Will the men of Buncombe, or Spartanburg, or of East Tennessee, or West Virginia, consent to enjoy no greater political weight than the slaves of our rice and cotton-fields ? Most surely they will not. They would demand the white basis as the basis of representation. The slave-holding population would be governed by those who hold no slaves, and the line of divi- sion between slaveholders and non-slaveholders in the South would be drawn clear, strong, and indefaceable, with a fixed majority in the hands of the last. Is it not clear then, that there will be abundant causes for difference and disa- greement, and that the hope that all will be easy and smooth in the formation of a Southern Confederacy, is a delusion and a snare. It will not be easy. Once break up the pre- sent Confederacy and the principle of voluntary cohesion is gone forever In this as in every other movement of change or revolution men never go back. The principle of voluntary association among the States will cease to exist. It will be followed by confusion and disorder first, and last by the forced combinations brought about by temporary interests, or military power. In this Avatar of disorder and ruin, the great pursuits of peace, civilization and refinement will be trodden under foot by the rapacious and ambitious de- 2 10 mngogues, who begin with being courtiers to the people, and end with being their tyrants. To all this what answer can possibly be made, but that we are a peculiar people ; among us there can be no dissention ; we shall enjoy perpe- tual harmony from Mason and Dixon's line to the Gulf; no dispute or discord can ever disturb the fraternity of our peo- ple ; a new series of ages will descend from heaven ; the lion will lie down with the lamb, the turbulent passions of men, and the crimes they lead to, will no longer deform the face of society, and Justice and the Golden Age, which have left all other regions of the earth, will nevertheless, re- visit our own. If for this shadow and delusion, the mere dream of distempered imaginations, we let go the substan- tial blessings of law and order, and peace at home, and se- curity from abroad, we shall most justly become a by-word among all nations. This is no occasion for listening to the voice of passion, or petulance, or indignation, however justly excited. It is one too grave, too solemn. No matter how much we may detest the vile factions that disgrace the Na- tion, let us not permit a proper abhorrence of them to hurry us into acts, the results of which no human sagacity can pre- tend to foresee. Let us not permit our minds to dwell light- ly on the terrors unspeakable of civil war, and become in- struments to accomplish what the worst men of the North are seeking and striving to bring about. And for what are we urged to dissolve the Confederacy ; to exchange unexampled peace and progress in all the arts "('civilized life, in wealth, in national strength, in power and influence among the strongest of the earth, for the unimagin- able honors of civil war, and political disorganization? What act of the Congress of the United States will justify u to put-selves, our posterity, and the world, in putting at jeopardy t!his our great experiment in Republican Govern- iij' nt — the benefits of which all people arc now enjoying? Fs it the Act settling the boundary of Texas? An offer to purchase her land is made by the United States for the pur- pose of quieting all disputes about that boundary. Texas 11 is free to sell or not, as she pleases. Will any other State pretend to say that she shall not do as she pleases with her own domain? Have not Maine, Virginia, North-Carolina, Georgia, and other States, given or sold portions of their territorial possessions? Do we mean to erect ourselves into guardians of the persons and property of the good people of Texas, and determine for them whether they shall exchange land which they do not want for money which they do? The Texan Senators approve, the Texan people accept the offer, but we refuse and profess to consider their sale of land for money as a violation of our constitutional rights, and a reason for dissolving the Confederacy. We claim the right to interfere, because of the consequential damages that may result to us. Why this is precisely the doctrine that Massachusetts is seeking to establish in reference to slavery in the South. She claims the right to interfere with our institutions on account of the injuries indirecily arising to the purity of her morals and the interests of her people. It is only necessary to state the proposition, and we see its ex- travagance. Is it the passage of the Territorial bills for Utah or New Mexico, that constitutes the breach of our constitutional rights? It is perfectly well understood, that Mr. Calhoun repudiated the Missouri Compromise line. He would have acquiesced in its establishment, but would not seek it, or approve it, or vote for it. He demanded, whether north or south of that line, Territorial governments in which Congress should include no provision on the subject of slavery, as it has no right to legislate respecting it in any shape or form.. And such precisely is the nature of the Territorial governments in question. The Congress of the United States have re- fused to incorporate in them the Wilmot Proviso. They have rejected that proposition by a large majority. They have passed Territorial bills without a syllable said for sla- very or againsfit. Ah, but we are told the Mexican laws are there. The Mexican laws, whatever they are, were not made by the Congress of the United States. We pro- 12 fess to dissolve the Uniou because the Legislature of the Union has infringed the Constitution. Where is the act of Congress which so infringes it? There is none. We might as reasonably say that the climate and soil of the Territory are equivalent to the Wilmot Proviso, and hold Congress responsible, as that the laws or customs of Mexico are so } and regard the United States Government as therefore inva- dine our constitutional rights. If the laws of New Mexico are contrary to the Constitution of the United States, those laws are void, and would be so declared by the Supreme Court. What more can we demand? Do we require that Congress shall interfere and enact that slavery is admissible within the Territory? Why this is at variance precisely with our own position — that Congress has no right whatever to legislate on the subject of slavery at all — that no such power is delegated — that any such assumption of power would be an usurpation. If we demand of Congress an act to admit, do we not in the same breath concede a right to exclude, and thus grant what we have all along most perti- naciously denied ? No, the Territorial bills for Utah and New Mexico do not in the remotest sense infringe the consti- tutional rights of the South. The attempt to make other things which are not Acts of Congress, equivalent to Acts e>' of Congress, and to draw the inference that the Constitution is infringed, is a sophism too evident to deceive, and quite too slender to justify a thought of dissolving the Confederacy for alleged violations of the Constitution of the United States. Is the- admission of California into the Union, the measure ih it will justify the destruction of the admirable creation produced by the Convention of 17S7, and the restoration of the political chaos which the great men of that day so nar- rowly and happily escaped? If it is said that there was much of irregularity, of want of conformity to precedent, of haste, ol disorder in making California a State, we may fair- ly admit it. The advocates of order know the advantage of 13 forms, and wish to see them strictly observed. They would have been better pleased if in the formation of a government for California, there had been no departure from the regular systematic mode of proceeding in similar cases. But the whole case of California is anomalous. There has been no- thing like it in the history of the world. The rush of multi- tudes into the country, the character of a great part of these adventurers, the necessity for a vigorous government with- out delay to prevent absolute anarchy, all these things con- stitute an exceptional case, quite as much so as that of Texas, and may equally excuse the absence of Territorial government, prior to their admission as States. But, how- ever this may be, whether California ought, or ought not to have been admitted into the Union, is a question of expedi- ency merely. There is no infringement of the Constitution in her admission as a State. It is a question over which Congress have power to act at their discretion. They may, or may not have acted discreetly or judiciously on the occa- sion, but the right to act is unquestionably theirs. The single condition prescribed by the Constitution is, that the government of the State asking admission should be Repub- lican. Has that condition not been complied with? If it has, then there is no other prescribed. The provision of the Constitution is, that Congress may admit new States. — There is no other in reference to the subject. One Congress may admit a new State under certain forms and regulations, another Congress may adopt others in another case. The jyr j-priety of uniformity is admitted, but the necessity of some regard to circumstances is equally apparent. Do we insist that the State applying should first have gone through a a Territorial form of government? What then should we : have done with Texas? Does the circumstance of her being a foreign State, justify a departure from the Rule, so also will other circumstances in other cases arising from time to time. There has then been no infraction of the Consti- 14 tut ion, not the shadow of any. The assertion that the ad- iin>>i.ui of California is a virtual adoption of the Wilmot "Proviso is a mere rhetorical flourish, and we are called upon t» dissolve; the Union for a figure of speech. Il may he asked too, considering the question on the ground of expediency, what difference, what practical dif- ference, the refusal to admit California could have made in reference to the question of slavery ? Would the delay of a year, often years, have produced a shade of change in her policy"? It may be fairly assumed that for one Southern man who would, under any circumstances, during that time, emigrate to California, one hundred or five hundred would go from other countries. Can we suppose that such a frac- tion of the population of the country, such an infinitismal nart of the people of California would shape its fundamen- tal laws, and control its policy? So far, therefore, as prin- ciple goes, there has been no breach of the Constitution in the admission of California, and so far as expediency or any practical results or benefits to the South are concerned, the refusal to admit, and any consequent delay, would make no difference to the Southern States in any possible mode. The Texan boundary, Utah, New-Mexico, and Califor- nia Acts then are not violations of the Constitution. They do not furnish such evidence of intention to infringe South- ern rights as would justify the extreme remedy of a dissolu- tion of the Union. On the other hand the fugitive slave Act a llords conclusive testimony that the General Government ;i dmits and feels the obligations of the Constitution. The Act has been passed in obedience to Southern demands and for the, preservation of Southern interests. It expresses' em- phatically on the part of the General Government, a. dispo- sitiop to enforce the provisions of the Constitution and to do us justice. As one of a s} r stem of measures, adopted for pi ace ;nnl conciliation, it is important as indicating the cha- • r "I ili't system; It speaks to the motive of the whole scheme. Jt shows that it was the purpose of Congressto 15 respect, to assert, to maintain the rights of the South. It is due to candour to admit this, and admitting it, can it be affirmed that the General Government is regardless of the constitutional rights of the Southern States? The very fact that this Act is odious to certain parties at the North, proves more clearly the resolution of the Government to do its du- ty. We may differ as to the character of the preceding measures, but about the fugitive slave Act, there is no differ- ence of opinion, nor can there be any as to the evidence which it conclusively, that the charge upon the Government of trampling on the Constitution and tearing it to pieces, is one of those monstrous chimeras, as mischievous as they are ephemeral, which party excitements produce in such abundance. But, it is said, the Act will not be executed. If it is not, the fault will not be that of the National Government. The people however of the West and North declare that it shall be ; it has been already enforced promptly and resolutely. Let us not condemn before we hear. Let us not act on a mere assumption that the law will be resisted or repealed, because a lawless faction is opposed to it. Negroes and abolitionists, in New- York or New-England, may threaten Bowie knives and revolvers, but the friends of order and law are more numerous than they, and more determined. Let us not mistake the brawling of the " monstrous rout," for the voice of the people — the noise, as Burke expresses it, " of the insects that fill the air with their importunate chink, for the utterance of the great cattle of the field that are qui- etly browsing in the shade." The motley crew with their piebald projects and petty ambitions, will pass away and be forgotten. They are but the dust on the Temple of American Liberty. Time will scatter the one to the four winds of heaven, whilst he adds perpetually, with a mellow- ing hand, to the grandeur and beauty of the other. But it may be rejoined although there has been no formal infraction of the Constitution, there are reasons sufficiently 16 cogent to justify the people of the South in resorting to the extreme measure of dissolving the Union. The resolutions passed by Northern Legislatures ; the hostile language of Northern members of Congress ; the abuse of Southern Insti- tutions and character by the Northern press ; the societies formed to assail our rights, and rob us of our property — these things are sufficient cause for offence and resentment. They are assuredly well fitted to excite the indignation of every Southern man, and to produce between North and South, mutual dislike and permanent animosity. They may lead, as a distinguished Senator from Georgia very justly re- marks, if persisted in, to the inevitable consequences of con- vincing the Southern people, that there is an invincible in- compatibility of character between the South and the North which may lead to a separation. But let us clearly distin- guish between aggressions on the part of the National Gov ernment, and aggressions on the part of the people of certain Northern States. If the Government have passed no Acts that can be justly said to violate the Constitution, and in- vade our rights, and we make the California Act, or any other the ground of quarrel, and the cause for a dissolution of the Union, we shall make up a false issue and assign an insufficient reason. We shall assume a position which we cannot maintain in the estimation even of the Southern States. But the acts and sentiments of the Northern people do furnish just causes for offence ; they are contrary to the comity that should exist between Nations ; they are viola- tions of the duties which they owe to States of the Confede- racy. It is against the people then of certain States that we should seek modes of redress. Instead of resolutions and declamations against the National Government — instead of threats to dissolve the Union, the attention of the South would seem to be directed more properly to discover some way of reaching the States or people that assail us. 17 In that case the remedy resorted to would naturally be appropriate to the evil we would redress. The wrono; of which we complain is in the state of Northern Society ; it is social, not political; it comes from the people of the North, not from the Governmei|t of the United States. When pub- lic opinion in the South is prepared to turn from resolutions to some more efficient defence, it will be of a social nature, therefore not a political one ; directed against the people of whose sentiments and proceedings we complain, not the National Government which has done us no injury. We are insulted, outraged by the sentiments expressed by Nor- thern communities in reference to Southern institutions and character, and we are resolved to apply a remedy. But that remedy would not be a dissolution of the Union. It would be one more appropriate to the purpose. We would not fly to surgery when a simple alterative might be suffi- cient. To the social wrong we would naturally apply a social remedy. We would withdraw from all friendly or commercial intercourse with the offending States ; we would cease to waste our incomes in Northern Cities ; we would no longer trade in Northern Ports where our people now buy goods sent from the South, where they could have purchased the same article at a lower price ; we would discourage the purchase of Northern manufactures; we would no longer send our sons to Northern Colleges to the neglect of our own ; or employ Northern ves sels, discouraging the ship-wrights and masters of vessels n our own Ports. These measures would be resorted to the more readily because whilst they spoke a significant warning to the Nor- thern people of the consequences to which their acts and sentiments directly lead, and supplied in themselves an effi- cient weapon against the offending States, they would be the cause of rapid progress in developing the resources of the South ; in improving its Colleges ; enlarging its manufac- turing enterprise ; increasing its domestic tonnage ; and 3 18 spending on improvements at home the large sums of mo- ney now squandered abroad. They may be sufficient to effect a cure of the evils of which we complain, without en- countering the crimes and sufferings of civil war. And surely it is the part of prudent men not to resort to desperate measures until all others have been tried and found to be unavailing. No surgeon amputates a limb, until he has lost all hope of saving it. The physician does not abandon the patient, until every remedy has been exhausted. Shall we be less careful and hopeful, when the limbs or life of a Nation are concerned ? It must be confessed however, thet there is nothing in the present condition of the South and North, that seems to indicate any disturbance in their social or commercial relations. The steamers are crowded with pas- sengers, the packets are loaded with goods, the most indig- nant complaints do not prevent the complainant from spend- ing his summer at Northern watering places. It has been sometimes thought that the disputes and divi- sions among certain Theological bodies are of evil augury, and portend civil and political dissentions in the nation. As justly might we conclude that the schism which has lately rent asunder the Church of Scotland, affords evidence of in- testine commotion in that country. Every one knows that of all assemblies of men, the most pertinacious and uncom- promising in opinion are those of the Clergy, and that above all other meetings under the sun, they are most prone to ex- hibit, not charity, forbearance, and brotherly love, but the absence of those virtues. That disputes should arise in the Baptist, Methodist, and other Churches of the United States, is not a whit more surprising than that they have existed, and do exist, in the Catholic, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian Churches of other countries. Between the Gallican and ultramontane parties of the one, or the Pusey- ii ■B •» o -»^ DEC "7"?, T^?^ N. MANCHESTFR A>*^ •*«_.»> A.