Cb7557m 11

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

ANTI-SLA VER T TEA GTS. No. 1 1.

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OUR DUTY.

BT REV. CHARLES E. HODGES.

In discussing this question, it should be remembered that it is in
the highest sense a moral question, and, as such, superior to any crit
icisms of an immoral expediency ; that its positions cannot be met
by arguments not based on the same fundamental principle from
which it starts, namely, that right is right, and therefore demands
the voluntary adherence of men — that wrong is wrong, and as such
must be repudiated; that in questions of this nature there is no
room for compromise or evasion. And it must be further borne in.
mind that, however much must be conceded to a necessary expedi
ency in matters purely political, nevertheless this great principle
must be applied, wherever it is applicable, equally to the affairs of
nations as of individuals. It is not claimed that governments and,
political associations should be either missionary societies, ecclesi
astical tribunals, or direct religious agencies ; yet no government or-
party has a. right, for any possible motive, itself to violate, or to
exact of any of its subjects or members a violation of the absolute
and immutable moral law.
If disunion be, as is asserted, a measure not simply of expe
diency, but of justice, not of mere policy, but of right, it cer
tainly is the duty of every honest man to investigate the subject
calmly and rationally, as he would any other subject making such-
claims. It is a duty he owes, not alone to the slave, whose emanci
pation he would secure, nor to the country, whose otherwise sure
and final ruin he would avert, but to himself as a moral agent re
sponsible for his actions.
To do this fairly, or at all, we have first to free ourselves of an
amount of prejudice unequalled in any other direction ; the preju
dice of education, ignorance, pride, and inherited reverence, all
(1)

2 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
of which is fostered by the mistaken patriotism of an uninquiring
public, and the atheistical idolatry of a human constitution and
political union, by most of the controlling minds of the country, in
both church and state, — a prejudice ao general and so confirmed,
that the impression is almost universal, that the United States Con
stitution is sacred as divine revelation, and the Union, however
cemented, to whatever base uses prostituted, of divine origin. To
investigate these, therefore, to question their right to be perpetuated,
or the duty of allegiance, is regarded with pious horror, as the ravings
of a disorganizing and impious fanaticism, a profanation of the sanc
tuary which shields us.*
Such view as this, it is evident, precludes all hope or necessity
of amendment, and denies even that final and universally-conceded
right of revolution. For. of course, if the Constitution and Union
are infallible and sacred, nothing can ever justify disobedience or
resistance. Whatever of oppression or injustice may be exercised
under the authority of the one, or by the force of the other, must be
patiently endured. A position, which no political theorist has ever
ventured to take. But, what is of even greater consequence, such a
view puts an end at once, to. the right of criticism, examination, and
moral judgment ; in other words, forbids the exercise of reason and
conscience. This is the necessary effect of the popular idea of the
sacredness of these things, and is the actual present state of public
sentiment. But, since the Constitution is of human origin, and the Union, ex
isting by virtue of that instrument, equally the result of human
agency, there is no sufficient reason why these should be more
infallible in their aim and operation than their authors, and no espe
cial heresy or impropriety in examining and criticizing their claims
upon us as honest men. With these rational views, with no preju
dice or preference, save for the truth, we may look at this question
of disunion with the hope of coming to some just conclusion.
And, at the outset, we are ready as any, to grant the importance
of some such union as ours for most ends of political existence
The physical constitution of the country, apart from other consider
* The Rev. Nehemiah Adams, D. D., in his " South Side View," page 128,
says, " There is a law of the land, a Constitution, to which we must submit,
or employ suitable means to change it. While it remains, all our appeals to a
' higher taw ' are fanaticism. "

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OUE DUTY. 3
ations, which need not be mentioned here, makes a union natural,
desirable, and in the end, perh-aps, essential. Probably no person
wishes to deny this. But the question is not of the advantage of
union (though it has been often and undeniably proved that in every
respect it is injurious to the north, and only advantageous to the
south, as it at present stands) ; the question is deeper than this ;
not, Is it expedient ? but, Is it right ? Have we a right, for the sake
of national greatness and power, or territorial integrity, or any con
ceivable material prosperity, or for any purpose whatsoever, to sus
tain a union, which demands, and for its preservation must secure,
from its citizens, a sacrifice of the fundamental and eternal laws of
religion and morality? We firmly and sincerely believe that we
have no such right; that nothing of presumed expediency or neces
sity, can justify conscious and deliberate acquiescence in, or support
¦of what we believe to be morally wrong. We stand on the asser
tion of the simplest, the very elementary principles of morality
and religion, that whatever is contrary to the universal, unchange
able, and very initial laws of God, cannot be made right by vote of
a majority ; that what is intrinsically wrong for one man is equally
so for a hundred, or a hundred thousand men ; and, on the same
principle, that what is wrong in one State is wrong in every State,
or in a union of States ; and yet further, that to defend or sustain
another in doing what we confess would be wrong for us, and is
wrong for them to do, involves us in an equal culpability for the sin
and its consequences.
It is on these simple principles that the abolitionist justifies, and
commends to the consideration of a candid public, his opposition to
the Union. It is wrong for us to support voluntarily, a government
or political union, which sustains iniquity. If, then, our Union does
sustain iniquity, it is wrong for us to abide by the Union. This, in
brief statement, is the position of the northern anti-slavery, and only
sincere disunionist, who is not insane.
Does the Union, then, protect, encourage, sustain iniquity, and do
we by our acts, as members of that Union, acquiesce!
We proceed, in answering this question, wi*h the assumption, that
slavery is not simply a social or political evil, but a sin and a crime, in
the fullest sense ; something which neither law nor presumed neces
sity can justify; which cannot exist, in howevei mitigated a form,
without infraction of the primal rights of human nature ; therefore

4 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
not without absolute and direct rebellion against God; who, by cre
ating man with the nature he has, .granted, by the very act of crea
tion, and guaranteed the rights, which that nature demands for its
satisfaction. Preeminent among these are the rights to life and lib
erty, and all which necessarily result therefrom; which even our
Declaration of Independence unqualifiedly asserts when it declares
them to be inalienable. Now, slavery actually alienates these
rights; robs three and a half millions of human beings of their
right to the pursuit of happiness, to liberty, and even to life — men,
women, and children, who, even granting their present inferiority,
are still human beings, endowed by their Creator with the common
human nature, and so equally entitled to human rights.
The assumption and exercise of the power and boasted right to
hold property in man, is the essential wrong, and the necessary
source and justification of the misery and iniquity which result; —
as, the denial to the slave of the. slightest opportunity for the cul
ture and development of the faculties given him in trust; the exac
tion of severe and wasting labor without compensation, and wrung
from the indolent and the feeble by the lash ; the encouragement
of prostitution in various ways, but most cruelly in its mocke-y of
the sacredness of marriage ; the separation and sale of husband
and wife, parent and child, and the many other infamous customs
of slavery. And these are not accidental, unusual, or mere abuses
of the system, but its necessary results, without which, slavery can
not exist, so declared in the statute laws of the slaveholding States,
and of constant occurrence under the administration of these laws.
So we say that the whole thing is, from beginning to end, in princi
ple and result, " de facto et de jure," sin, and nothing but sin, and
that continually. It should seem unnecessary, it certainly is hu
miliating, to feel compelled to waste a word, or a moment of time,
in stating such evident propositions as these : that slavery is sin, at
war with the holiest instincts of our nature, the essential rights of
man, the principles of Christianity, and the will of God ; and, that
we have no right deliberately to countenance or sustain sin. But
we are fallen on unhappy times, when even learned and influential
ministers of religion, (so accredited,) occupying commanding social
positions, urge, with the calm and mature deliberation of printed
argument and appeal, the opposite doctrines; and when men gladly
accept these modern, Protestant indulgences to countenance and

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OUR DUTY. 5
abet in man stealing, prostitution, and all the iniquity of slavery
with untarnished title to respect here, and duly endorsed passport
to heaven.
Nothing more, certainly, need be said to prove — what, it is pre
sumed, after all, most men here at the north will grant — that slavery
is sin, and that we have no right to sanction or encourage sin. And
any man who grants this, has granted all we ask ; for we assert,
what a very few words will confirm, that in sustaining the Union,
we are encouraging and upholding slavery ; and even more strongly,
that without the Union, as it now exists, slavery could not stand
another day.
Our present political position proves our connection with the sin.
In closest league with States in which slavery, with all its infamy,
is sustained by express statute — States in which this system is
supreme, the controlling element in all affairs, political and reli
gious, and which have succeeded, for nearly seventy years, ever
since the Union was formed, in subjecting the legislation of the
entire country to their will, making the general government, which
by virtue of numbers, is ours more than theirs, favor, foster, and ex
tend slavery, till it has grown to what it is. We are in intimate
union with these States, in partnership with them in crime. We
swear to abide by a Constitution, which guarantees perpetual pos
session of his slaves to the slaveholder, which grants him unusual
privileges, in proportion to the number of his slaves, and finally,
guarantees perpetual enjoyment of those privileges. We meet with
them in the 'national Congress, yielding them a larger representation
there, than an equal number of non-slaveholders, in proportion to
their iniquity. We make laws together, elect officers in common,
pay taxes into a common treasury, collect a common revenue, make
treaties and form alliances with other nations, as one people, united
in principle and interest. We associate with them in church and
state, as friends and fellow-Christians, and do their bidding in all
things, without noticeable or efficient protest. We have thus openly
committed ourselves, in the eyes of the world, to a participation in
their guilt, and in the court of conscience, to an equal responsibility
for the sin. For our association with the slave States is not a partial
or limited confederacy, formed for protection against a common dan
ger, for special purposes, in no wise connected with this peculiar
evil, in which we hold no part, and for which we are not responsi-
1*

6 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
ble. Such argument is not merely fallacy, but falsehood. Un
doubtedly, an alliance of that nature is possible between two or
more States, without involving an acquiescence from either one, in
the peculiar faith, institutions, or customs of the other. As England
and France are, at this moment, acting as associates and alliesof the
Turk, without suspicion of countenancing either Islamism or polyg
amy. But our Union is not of that temporary or limited character.
It is not a partial and independent alliance, in view of some press
ing emergency, to cease when that is past. Were it so, the hour
for dissolving that connection arrived long ago. Ours is an unlim
ited partnership, a perpetual and peculiar confederation, of the most
.intimate character. One which unites both north and south, the free .
and the slave States," into a common country, under one central
government, under a federal Constitution, the fundamental law of
the land, which grants, as has been said, extraordinary privileges to
the slaveholders — 1st, a three-fifths representation for their slaves
in the national Congress ; 2d, a pledge to restore fugitives ; and 3d,
the pledge that we will labor, and, if necessary, fight to repel ag
gression, and to suppress any efforts that may be made by the op
pressed to regain their freedom. Now, in illustration of our position,
we w'll take a supposable ease, thus : I form a partnership in trade
wit.i a notoriously wicked man, one who is dishonest in his deal
ings, given to theft and falsehood, engaged in constant brawls, liv
ing in open adultery, and feeding his lust by force. In our articles
of agreement. I allow him an undue interest in the concern, in pro
portion to his iniquity ; agree to continue the connection, despite his
character, though he should cheat even me ; pledge myself to de
fend his practices; and, more, should any victims of his knavery or
unholy violence resist, or rise against him, to shoot them down.
Now, should I do all this, I could as justly claim exemption from
any responsibility for, or encouragement of that man's iniquity, as
we can, under the Union, disclaim any responsibility for slavery
and its inevitable iniquities. The. cases are strictly parallel. The
man who swears to sustain the Constitution, which grants and the
Union, which sustains slavery, is certainly, in the sight of God, as
guilty as one would be in the case I have supposed. The cry,
" Freedom national, slavery sectional," is an absurdity. It is im
possible under the Union. Slavery existing any where in these
- States is the sin of the whole people.

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OUE DUTY. 7
From what has already been said, it is apparent that slavery exists
only by virtue of the Union. This is further confirmed by the vol
untary confessions of a few southern gentlemen, who exhibit either
superior sagacity or a greater degree of honesty than is common in
their portion of the country. In the debate in Congress on the ques
tion of censuring John Q. Adams for presenting a petition for disso
lution of the Union, Mr. Underwood, of Kentucky, said, —
" They (the south) were the weaker portion, were in the minority. The
north could do what they pleased with them ; they could adopt their own
measures. All he asked was, that they would let the south know what those
measures were. One thing he knew well — that the State which he in part
represented had perhaps a deeper interest in this subject than any other, ex
cept Maryland and a small portion of Virginia. And why ? Because he knew
that to dissolve the Union and separate the different States composing this
confederacy, — making the Ohio river and Mason and Dixon's line the boun
dary line, — he knew as soon as that was done, slavery was done in Kentucky,
Maryland, and a large portion of Virginia, and it would extend to all the
States south of this line. The dissolution of the Union was the dissolution of
slavery. It had been the common practice for southern men to get up on this
floor and say, ' Touch this subject, and we will dissolve this Union as a rem
edy.' Their remedy was the destruction of the thing which they wished to
save, and any sensible man could see it. If the Union were dissolved into two
parts, the slave would cross the line, and then turn round and curse his master
from the other shore."
Mr. Thomas D. Arnold, of Tennessee, in a speech on the same
subject, spoke as follows: —
" The free States had now a majority of forty-four in that house. Under
the new census they would have fifty-three. The cause of the slaveholding
States was getting weaker and weaker, and what were they to do ? He would
ask his southern friends what the south had to rely on if the Union were dis
solved ? Suppose the dissolution could be peaceably effected, (if that did not
involve a contradiction in terms,) what had the south to depend upon ? All
the crowned heads were against her. A million of slaves were ready lo rise and
strike for freedom at the first tap of the drum. They were cut loose from
their friends at the north (friends that ought to be, and without them the
south had no friends); whither were they to look for protection? How were
they to sustain an assault from England or France, with that cancer at then-
vitals ? The more the south reflected, the more clearly she must see that she
had a deep and vital interest in maintaining the Union."
The editor of the Maryville (Tenn.) Intelligencer, in an article
on the slave population, wrote thus : —

8 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
" We of the south are emphatically surrojinded by a dangerous class of
beings, — degraded, stupid savages, — who, if they could but once entertain
the idea that immediate and unconditional death would not be their portion,
would react the St. Domingo tragedy. But the consciousness, with all their
stunidity, that a tenfold force, superior in discipline, if not in barbarity, would
gather from the four corners of the United States, and slaughter them, keeps
them in subjection. But to the non-slaveholding States particularly we are
indebted for a permanent safeguard against insurrection. Without their assist
ance, the white population of the south would be too weak to quiet that in
nate desire for liberty which is ever ready to act itself out with every rational
creature." More recently, Mr. Gentry, member of Congress from Tennessee,
thought it would be better for the south to submit to the Wilmot
proviso than to dissolve the Union, as he " believes that the con
tinued existence of slavery rests upon the existence of the Union."
Every slave will confirm what these gentlemen tell us — that
what prevents the slaves securing their liberty, is not their degrada
tion, nor fear of their masters, but the fear, into which they are care
fully educated, of the intervention of the northern States. The first
successes of the Nat Turner insurrection, and its final suppression
by the forces of the Union, teach the value of that Union to the
slaveholder, and afford a painful precedent of despair to the unhappy
slave. It is idle to offer further evidence. Every one who under
stands the Constitution, and interprets it fairly, and who knows so
much o." history as is comprised in the records of these States for
seventy years, must confess that the Union is the main stay of
slavery, and that were the Union dissolved, slavery that moment
hastens to its end. No man, therefore, can properly regard the posi
tion of the abolitionist as other than reasonable and just, fully sanc
tioned, in the light of religion and humanity, by such facts and ad
missions as have been stated. A position, whose justice is implied
by the Hon. Horace Mann, in his eloquent and able speech in Con
gress, August 17, 1852, when he says, " Let me ask if the political
free soil party do not go to the uttermost verge that patriot, moralist,
or Christian can go, when it consents to let slavery remain where it
is ? " To his question we reply, Yes ; and beyond that dizzy and
bewildering verge, where a mistaken expediency overlaps the
boundaries of right, farther than either patriot, moralist, or Christian
can go. lt is on these grounds that a dissolution of the Union is
urged ; because, first, while we remain in the Union we are respon-

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OTJR DUTY. 9
sible for slavery, which the Union sustains, and second, because we
believe, that in disunion lies the only hope of emancipation for the
slave. No reference has been made to the corrupting influence of slavery
upon the country ; its constant aggressions upon our liberties ; its
control of the political parties ; its despotic use of the general gov
ernment as a tool for the promotion of its interests, by patronage,
public moneys, and unjust enactments ; its wars, fought by northern
men, paid for by northern money; its prostitution of justice, through
packed juries, profligate attorneys, and unjust judges ; for all these
things the north has power to correct if she will ; though it is an im
possible expectation, that the north will ever be sufficiently free and
united, to rule by virtue of its numerical preponderance, while slavery
exists as a recognized power in the State. But we omit any argu
ment based on these things, which admit of possible cure. For, in
respect to these things, the fault (strictly speaking) is not directly
with the Union. These, we are not forbidden to prevent, and there
fore, of themselves, afford no necessary or unavoidable reason for a
separation. Now, this same argument, could it be applied to the
Constitution, would be equally valid against our measure of disso
lution. If it were possible, under the Constitution, to abolish slavery,
and we could be freed from the responsibility of an immoral oath,
if it were possible so to alter the Constitution as to expunge its
slave clauses, and allow us to move for abolition, — then the Union
need not, necessarily, be severed. But how is it, in fact1?
The Constitution is pro-slavery. That has been assumed through
out. Nothing need be said on that point, save to refer the reader to
the first tract of this series, or to Mr. Phillips's reply to Lysander
Spooner. Facts, evidence, usage, the interpretation of our courts,
the public voice, and the instrument itself, are unanimous in their
decision of that point. That Constitution is the fundamental federal
law. Whatever is constitutional may be done ; whatever is uncon
stitutional (save when in favor of slavery) may not be done. It
stands, therefore, as the supreme law of the land, and is regarded
by the people as a sort of external conscience. Here, then, we have
an authority, established nearly seventy years ago, to control the legis
lation of a great and growing country, increasing, since that author
ity was established, from thirteen to thirty-one States, and seven
enormous Territories, and, in population, from three to twenty-three

10 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
millions — an authority from which there is no appeal; which neither
changing social needs, the growing wants of a growing country, nor
increasing intelligence and virtue, and capacity of men for freer
forms, nor any exigency or circumstance whatever can question.
But even further ; this authority, which admits of no appeal, hears
no petitions, which is blind, deaf and heartless, in its protection of
sin, this authority is perpetual. The Constitution cannot be altered,
so that there may be just laws, which shall be at the same time
constitutional, so that we may obey conscience legally, and speak
and act for the right, without arrest for treason. Provision is made,
indeed, for amendment, but under conditions so strict and impossi
ble, that it amounts to prohibition, so far as any great dividing ques
tion, like slavery, is concerned. Article V. of the Constitution reads
as follows : " The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall
deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution ;
or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several
States, shall call a convention for proposing amendments ; which,
in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of
this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of
the several States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the
one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by Congress."
By this article, therefore, not one State alone, not all New England,
not the entire north, have any right to propose a modification or
repeal of the slave clauses of the Constitution. As we now stand,
twenty-one States must agree to propose an amendment, before the
proposition can be received; and after that is done, twenty-four
States must ratify that amendment, before it can be law. Is not
this simple statement sufficient? Who so sanguine or visionary, that
he dare hope for a vote of three fourths of the States, to free our
Constitution from its protection of slavery, or even of two thirds of
the States to make such a proposal. This very difficulty was alluded
to by Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, a member of the convention
which framed the Constitution. In a letter to the Virginia legisla
ture, explaining his reasons for refusing to sign the Constitution, he
says, " My opinion always was, and still is, that every citizen of
America, let the crisis be what it may, ought to have a full oppor
tunity to propose, through his representatives, any amendment which
in his apprehension tends to the public welfare. By signing, I
should have contradicted this sentiment. * * * I may be asked

DISUNION OUR WISDOM AND OUR DUTY. 11
why the mode pointed out in the Constitution, for its amendment,
may not be a sufficient security against its imperfections. My an
swers are, That it is better to amend while the passions of design
ing men are not yet enlisted, and while a bare majority of the States
may amend, than to wait for the uncertain assent of three fourths;
that a bad feature in government becomes more and more fixed
every day; * * * and that in the present case it may be ques
tionable whether, after the particular advantages of its operation
shall be discerned, three fourths of the States can be induced to
amend." Here, then, we have the singular spectacle, of a Constitution, which
is the national fundamental law, the bond of union, and supreme,
from whose authority there is no appeal, which is unchangeable and
eternal, formed nearly seventy years ago, not by an omniscient power,
but by men like ourselves; men who yet made laws not for them
selves alone, not for their times, suited to their political necessities
alone, but, with an assumption of infallibility almost impious, for
their children's children, to the remotest generation, for every age,
to the end of time or of the Union. Absolute beyond the possible
limits of monarchical despotism, our charter of tyranny, not only
makes laws, but makes them perpetual. And in swearing to tin
Constitution, we are compelled, virtually, to swear to its perpetuity j;i*t
as it is. That Constitution is pro-slavery. Viewed, then, in the
light of all that is urged, (and can logic or inspiration point to any
other conclusion?) he is not the traitor lo his country, but the only
true patriot as well as Christian, who labors for the peaceful disso
lution of this Union.
The question of the policy of this movement, apart from its effect
in removing slavery, we have not discussed. We care not to dis
cuss it; though the fears, so commonly expressed, of consequent
disaster and rum, might easily be shown to be unfounded. But
whether so or not, it is a fatal admission for any one to make, that
the prosperity and safety of the country depend on sustaining sin, and
would be perilled by removing it ; still more fatal to say, that any con
ceivable danger to existing institutions, can justify persevering and
perpetual disobedience to the supreme law of God. But there is no
danger of disaster or ruin in the success of the measure proposed,
even were it put into execution at once. There is, however, no im
mediate prospect of that. A score or two of abolitionists cannot

12 ANTI-SLAVERY TRACTS.
dissolve the Union. Their principles must first be carried home to
the consciences of the people of the north. Thus the public mind
will be prepared for the change, when it can be made, and all need
ful precautions taken. And when the people are ready, then the
Union is broken, the Constitution repealed, slavery abolished. Then,
and not till then, shall we be able to secure, what, in the preamble
to our Constitution, the present Union proposed, but has signally
failed to effect — "a more perfect union," which will "estab
lish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, promote the general welfare,
and secure the blessings of Uberty to ourselves and oar posterity.''
Our purpose is not incendiary. We do not expect to dissolve the
Union, alone. With the truest and most disinterested love of justice,
humanity, and our country, we simply ask cooperation, and for this,
appeal to the conscience and understanding of the people. There
is no necessity, therefore, for any definite answer to the question,
" How do you propose to do this thing ? " It is not the time to lay
out a plan of the campaign, to open trenches, dispose forces, and
besiege the citadel, while we yet have no forces, save only a few
recruiting officers. The thing to be done now is, to urge upon every
man this question — Are you ready? If you (believing slavery a
sin, and that it is wrong to sustain sin) believe that the American
Union does sustain slavery, can you do otherwise than commit
yourself to this cause, as the only hope for the slave, the only meas
ure of salvation for the country, and a simple expression of adhe
sion to the eternal laws of the Almighty ?

Published for gratuitous distribution, at the Office of the American
Anti-Slavery Society, No. 138 Nassau Street, New York. Also
to be had at the Anti-Slavery Offices, No. 21 Cornhill, Boston, and
No. 31 North Fifth Street, Philadelphia.