Desire for self-government.-Revolt against Great Britain People of North and South strongly antagonistic.-Causes of this South originally predominant.-Effects of immigration Effects of change in the ratio of representatives to number. True character of the question of slavery in the territories Facts showing it to be a political and not moral question Northern views opposed to the Constitution and the Supreme Hardships of slavery greatly exaggerated.-Comparisons Negro labour essential to the cultivation of the South. Question of property and also of strong feeling Conduct of Abolitionists.-Absence of practical measures Excuses offered for it.-Taxation without representation Decay of older Southern States attributed to tariffs Difficulties of the inquiry from external appearances Sketch of the framing of the Constitution Secession not a novel doctrine.-Asserted by the North Arguments used against secession.-Replies to them No clause forbidding secession.-The reasons for this The phrase, "We, the people."-Its true signification Question of sovereignty originally in each separate State Repealing ordinance of Georgia.-Powers of a Convention State Constitutions.-Their principles and effect. STRUGGLE TO MAINTAIN THE UNION. Leaders of the movement not expecting civil war Superiority of the North in numbers considered Comparative financial effects of the war Comparative military qualities.-Value of officers Comparative political ability.-Difference of motive Material obstacles to invasion.-Positions.-Panics Space.-Russian war.-Revolutionary war decided by it Measures adopted.-Blockade.-Expeditions by sea Sketch of operations of an invading army.-Its difficulties. Question of privateering and measure of blockade Imputation of sordid motives.-Disproval by facts Capacity of Southern trade.-Its value to ourselves Consequences of a restoration of the Union if practicable Advantages of separation to both parties Magnitude of the Northern power afterwards THE AMERICAN UNION. CHAPTER I. THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE UNION. No subject attracts so large a share of public attention, at the present day, as the American Union. In France and Germany, as well as in this country, its disruption affects interests of such magnitude, that in each of them it seems rather the shock of a great national calamity than the subdued reaction of some remote event. In this country the interest is twofold, for beyond its effect on commerce, the final result will shape, through all future time, the fortunes of a people who are destined to be the most numerous family of our race. The subject is thus of commanding interest to all thoughtful minds, whether intent on political inquiry, or engaged in mercantile pursuits, whether depressed by the former history of similar events, or but recently elated with the buoyant hopes which the exulting prosperity of the New World encouraged. And there are those who are impressed with the belief, that it may prove impossible for this country to maintain a B policy of inaction for so long a period as civil wars have usually endured. We are, indeed, already parties to the contest, as sharing the suffering it creates. So far the progress of events has still permitted us to look on as spectators; but the time approaches when large masses of our population will be reduced to want, and when, however anxious to maintain neutrality, it will become extremely difficult to continue in an attitude of indifference. There is also the established policy of modern times, which, discarding the old doctrine of divine right, recognizes established governments as matter of fact, leaving the discussion of their origin or right to those who adopt or dispute them. On this policy we have acted in all the cases which have hitherto occurred in America. To refuse to apply the rule in the present case, would be to make an exception; and this might fairly be construed by the party whom it would affect as a breach of the spirit of neutrality, which should aim at treating all alike. If acted upon, it will plainly be unsafe to rely on the equanimity of the other belligerent. Yet the question may arise at no very distant date, and it will claim our decision. That decision will greatly influence the issue of the contest; and looking to the irretrievable nature of its consequences, it will readily be admitted that public opinion, which must guide so largely the action of government, can hardly be too fully informed upon the merits of the case. |