Various - Continental Monthly, Vol. II. July, 1862. No. 1.

V >> Various >> Continental Monthly, Vol. II. July, 1862. No. 1.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20

Were further argument needed to establish this position, it is found in
the fact that the seeds of rebellion are wanting in proportion to the
absence of slavery. There is no reason to believe that Kentucky or
Maryland, without slavery, would have been less loyal than Ohio. In
Eastern Kentucky, Western Virginia, Eastern Tennessee, Western
North-Carolina, a small portion of Georgia, and Northern Alabama, the
Union cause finds a friend's country. These sections, in the main,
contain a population dependent upon its own labor for subsistence.
Schooled by diligent industry to habits of perseverance, and learning
independence and manhood by relying on itself, it has preserved its
patriotism and attachment to the Government under which it was born. It
saw no cause of complaint, imaginary or real. Six or seven per cent of
slave population has not proved sufficient as a slave interest, to
prostrate or corrupt its national fidelity, nor to undermine its
national pride. It still retains its representation in Congress against
the influences of surrounding treason. There is a cheering satisfaction
in the belief that this plateau of civil liberty and freedom, even
unassisted, could not have been permanently held in subjection by the
myrmidons of rebellion. The secessionists themselves bestow a high
compliment to the patriotism of this people, when they complain of its
'idolatrous attachment to the old Government.'

The time has come when the American people, from necessity, must analyze
to their root the whole aptitudes and incidents of slavery. They are now
obliged to deal with it, unbridled by the check-rein of its apologists.
Under the best behavior of slaveholders, the institution could not rise
above the point of bare toleration. There is so much inherent in the
system that will not bear analysis, so much of collateral mischief, so
much tending to overturn and discourage the principles of justice that
ought to be interwoven into the relationships of society, that it is
impossible for the ingenuous mind to advocate slavery _per se_. It is
not, however, to the bare dominion itself, that the objection is
exclusively raised up. It is the inevitable result of that dominion, in
connection with the worst cultivated passions of human nature, that the
exception is more broadly taken. The dominion of the master over the
slave involves in a great measure the necessary dominion over the
persons and interests of the balance of society where it exists. The
lust of power on the part of slaveholders, and on the part of the
privileged classes in Europe, in nature, is the same. The determination
through the artificial arrangements of power, to subsist on the toil of
others, is the same. The arrogant assumption of the right to maintain as
privilege what originated in atrocious wrong, is the same. The
disposition to crush by force any attempt to vindicate natural rights,
or to modify the status of society under the severity of oppression, is
the same; and no tyranny has yet been found so tenacious or
objectionable as the tyranny of a class held together by the 'bond of
iniquity.' Our forefathers had a just conception of the nature of the
case, on one hand, when they interdicted by fundamental law the
establishment of any order of nobility. Many of them were sorely
distressed at the contemplation of slavery on the other hand, in
connection with its probable results upon the national welfare. Our
calamity is but the fulfillment of their prophecies. They well knew the
nature of the evil we have to deal with.

It is matter of astonishment to most minds that slaveholders should have
contemplated the bold venture of subordinating the Democratic principle
in government. It will be less astonishing, however, when it is duly
considered that it is utterly impossible for Democracy and Slavery to
abide long together. The one or the other must ere long have been
prostrated under the laws of population, and it is not very likely that
the twenty-seven millions and their increase would consent to be
subordinated to the policy of three hundred and fifty thousand
slaveholders. Slavery must exist as the ruling political power, or it
can not long exist at all. This the slaveholders well knew; hence the
necessity of fortifying itself through some political arrangement
against the Democratic power of the masses.

The South-Carolina platform for a new government had close resemblance
to the ancient Roman--a patrician order of nobility, founded on the
interested motive to uphold slavery; but allowing plebeian
representation, to some extent, to the non-slaveholding classes. Others
in the South had preference for constitutional monarchy, with a class of
privileged legislators, and House of Commons, composing a government of
checks and balances, analogous to the English government. Whatever the
plan adopted, the leading idea was to institute a government that should
be impervious, through one branch, to the future influence of the
non-slaveholding majority.

It is difficult to make entirely clear the ambitious motives and mixed
apprehensions that have combined to precipitate the Southern
slaveholders into rebellion. The defectiveness of the educational system
of the South, and the known responsibility of slaveholders for such
defect and its consequences; the defect in the industrial policy, and
the responsibility of slavery itself for the depressing consequences to
the non-slaveholding population, were fearful charges. A knowledge that
the causes of depression must soon be brought to the examination of
Southern masses, in contrast with a better state of things in the North,
filled the minds of slaveholders with jealous and fearful apprehensions
toward the non-slaveholding population. They knew that its interests
were identified with the Northern educational and industrial policy.
They appreciated fully that through these interests, free labor in the
South had every motive to affinity with the North, educationally,
politically, and industrially. They were astute in the discovery that
under the operation of the Democratic principle, free discussion, and
fair play of reason, the pro-slavery prestige must soon go down in the
South before the greater numerical force of Southern masses. It was,
therefore, not only necessary, as supposed, to overturn the power of the
masses in the South, but also to make them the instruments of their own
overthrow as to political power.

The measurable acquiescence of the non-slaveholding population was
indispensable to the revolutionary project. Without it, there was but
little numerical force. It was, therefore, of entire consequence to make
this population hate the North--to hate the National Government, and to
train it for the purposes of rebellion. The press was suborned wherever
it could be. The pulpit manifested equal alacrity, in order to keep pace
with the workings of the virus of treason. Leading men, assuming to be
statesmen and political economists, taxed their ingenuity in the
invention of falsehood. The effort of the press and politicians was
directed to misrepresenting and disparaging the condition of free labor
in the North; whilst the Southern pulpit was religiously engaged in
establishing the divinity of slavery. It would require a volume to
delineate the arts and hypocrisy resorted to, and the false reasoning
employed, to impose upon the masses of white labor South, and to make
them contented with their disparaged condition. It is needless to say,
the work of imposition was too effectually accomplished. It must be
confessed that too much of the non-slaveholding population had been
induced to follow the political Iagos of the South, and thus to assist
the first act in the plan for its own subversion--separation from the
North. The next step in the plan of subversion, the 'abrogation of a
government of majorities,' was carefully kept from the public view.

The inquiry naturally arises, as to how or why this design for the
arrangement of political power in the Southern Confederacy has been
confined within such narrow degrees of disclosure. The answer is plain.
A bold proposition to change the principles of their government would
have alarmed the people of the South into an intensified opposition. The
politicians of South-Carolina, more open and frank in the exposition of
their views than other leaders in the South, have been obliged to submit
the control of their discretion to the more crafty and subtle influences
of other States. Policy required that the contemplated new form of
government should be confined to the knowledge of the leading spirits
only. It would not bear the hazards of submission to the people as a
basis of revolution. Its success depended upon secresy and coupling the
adoption of the plan with a sudden _denouement_ after revolution. Any
one conversant with the pages of De Bow's _Review_ for the last ten
years, and who has watched the drift of argument in reviling the masses,
and contemning their connection with government; and accustomed also to
the 'accidental droppings' from secessionists in their cups, has had
little difficulty in determining the ultimatum in the designs of
treason. He will have become convinced that it is nothing less than a
warfare against the continuation of Democratic government in the
South--that this warfare is stimulated by the fixed belief that a
government of majorities must be superseded, in order to perpetuate the
institution of slavery.

Were argument wanting to force this conclusion on the mind, it would be
supplied in the established affinity between the emissaries of secession
in Europe and the virulent haters of Democratic government there found.
The liberalists of England and elsewhere have been sedulously avoided;
not so those who would connive to bring Democratic government into
disrepute. With these last-mentioned classes, the secessionists have met
with a ready sympathy and encouragement, almost as much so, as if
treason in America involved directly the stability of privileged power
on that continent. The Tories of England, the Legitimists of France, the
nauseous ingredients of the House of Hapsburg, the degenerate nobility
of Spain, and from that down to the 'German Prince of a five-acre
patch,' have been the congenial allies of secession emissaries in
Europe. It mattered not to these haters of enfranchised masses how much
misery might be inflicted on the American people. They cared little for
the anguish of mind that was being every where felt by the supporters of
liberalized opinions. They rejoiced at the supposed calamities of that
government whose beneficent policy had always been to keep the peace, to
avoid the necessity of standing armies, to foster industry and
education, and in addition thereto, to encourage the depressed of Europe
to come and accept homes and hospitable treatment on the soil of the
country. These revilers of Democracy in Europe were long advised with,
were consulted beforehand, and knew the plottings of the pro-slavery
spirit, in its preparation for rebellion. They were indifferent as to
the character or hateful deformity of the agency to be employed,
provided it could be made instrumental in breaking the jurisdiction of a
government, heretofore more esteemed by the enlightened liberalists of
the world than any other that ever existed. Neither the secessionists
nor their co-plotters in Europe required seducing or proselyting. They
stood on the same level of affinity, the moment the secessionists
proposed the overthrow of the Democratic principle. This was the
promise, the condition precedent, and this the basis of alliance between
the plotters of treason in free America and their coaedjutors abroad. It
would be both shallow and useless to charge the origin of sympathy with
rebellion projects, expressed by political circles in Europe, to the
mercenary motives of commerce, trade, or manufactures. Those were
standing on a broad foundation of contented reciprocity, and were the
first to dread the tumult that could not fail to prove prejudicial. We
shall hunt in vain to find the motive for European sympathy in
rebellion, elsewhere than in hatred of Democracy. We shall also search
in vain to find the motive for the wide-spread sympathy expressed by the
liberalists of Europe in the Union cause, elsewhere than in their
attachment to liberalized institutions.

Having glanced at the compound motive for establishing the Southern
Confederacy, that is, slavery perpetuation through prostration of the
Democratic principle, it may not be amiss to refer to the contemplated
management of its _politico-economic_ interests. These were to be built
up, of course; but not through a system of diversified industry; for
free trade, as is well known, would have the effect to prostrate what
little manufacturing had been commenced in the South, and afford a
perpetual bar to the success of future undertakings. It was believed
that the foul elements North and South, and the illicit traders of the
world beside, could be brought together in the business of free trade
and smuggling. The immense frontier would render it impossible for the
Northern States to protect themselves to much extent from illicit trade,
through any preventive service possible to be adopted. The Mexican
frontier would be entirely helpless. Thus reasoned _Secesh_. This was to
have been the basis of competition with Northern mechanism. The
reasonings of the conspirators were consistent with the merits and
morals of the conspiracy. They calculated upon the active cooeperation of
the mercenary in the North, and actually believed that the temptation to
gain would prove predominant over any efforts the Northern Government
could make to protect its revenue policy. They boldly ventured upon the
assumption that the influences of illicit traffic would soon become too
strong to be resisted, and that in this manner, in conjunction with the
agency of 'King Cotton,' the commerce of the North would be transferred
to the South.

Another item in Southern political economy was the project of reoepening
the African slave-trade. The leaders of the secession programme had made
this a prominent feature in starting the rebellion into growth. The
various phases which this branch of the question afterward underwent,
was owing to the opposition of the Border States. So much were the
people of the Border States averse to being brought into competition
with slave-breeding in Dahomey, that the original conspirators were
obliged to forego, for a time at least, this incident in the motives of
the earlier revolutionists.

A government founded on the supremacy of a class, and that class to be
composed of slaveholders; a political economy founded on slave labor,
free trade, illicit trade, and African kidnapping, were associations
that would require great strength and influence to sustain them. The
strongest military organization was therefore contemplated. In this,
much employment could be given to the non-slaveholding masses, while
military qualities of supposed superiority would enable the Southern
Confederacy to enter into a successful contest with the North for
empire. The potency of 'King Cotton' was to be made the powerful agency
with which the rest of the civilized world was to be dragooned into
acquiescence. On this delusive dream was built the fabric of that mighty
empire, whose history, from its origin to its subversion, is nearly
ready to be written.

It must be acknowledged that the leading influences of the rebellion
were as sharp-sighted as political vice, or political immorality is ever
capable of becoming. Like all other vice, however, it based its
reasonings and supposititious strength exclusively on its powers of
deception, in conjunction with the iniquitous aptitudes of itself and
its coadjutors. It found co-plotters in Mozart Hall, in the stockholders
of the African Slave-trade Association, scattered from Maine to Texas,
and in its suborned press in New-York, Baltimore, Charleston, and
New-Orleans. It had bargained with the politically vitiated portion of
the Northern Democracy for assistance, and had received a wicked though
fallacious assurance from the Northern kidnappers, to the effect, that
the Democracy of the North would neutralize any attempt to oppose
secession by force. They had arranged for their diplomatic influence on
the other side of the Atlantic, and bargained for the subversion of
Democracy in the South. It planned beforehand for arming treason and
disarming the Union, and most adroitly were its plans in this respect
carried into effect. It had gained over to its side most of the Southern
material in the little army and navy of the country, and prepared it for
perfidy, in committing devastation or theft on the public property. Thus
allied and thus equipped, in the confidence of its pernicious strength,
it commenced its warfare on society.

'How much injury can we inflict upon the North? How much of the debts
owing to Northern citizens can we confiscate? How much property in the
South owned by Northern men can we appropriate? How much can we make
Northern commerce suffer by depression of business, privateering, or
otherwise? To what extent can we paralyze Northern mechanical industry,
subvert Northern trade, and lay it under disabilities? How much can we
distress the laboring classes in England, in France, in other countries
in Europe, whereby we may compel them to clamor for the intervention of
their respective governments against the North, and against its attempts
to uphold the Union?' The whole reasoning of the conspirators was based
on the supposed power, coupled with the intent and effort to inflict
wide-spread and common injury. The scheme and all its contemplated and
attempted incidents of management were such as the pro-slavery spirit in
politics only could engender.

It required many years of gradual development, in connection with the
ultimate culmination of treason, to shake the confidence of the North in
the disposition of the people of the South. There was, and could be, no
possible intelligent motive for the masses of the South to change their
form of government, or to enter into rebellion against it. The arguments
of the plotters of treason against a 'government of majorities'--the
doctrine of 'State rights,' with the right to secede at the option of a
State--the _quasi_ repudiation of the 'white trash,' so called, as an
element of political equality, were regarded as the ebullitions of a
politically vitiated class who would be willing to overthrow the
National Government, but who were supposed to be too few in numbers to
taint with poisonous fatality the political mind of the South. It is not
established as yet that the Southern political mind in the main has
become depraved. It is, however, established, that the leading political
influences South have cajoled and terrorized the bulk of the Southern
population into apparent acquiescence in treason. It yet remains to be
seen what disposition will be disclosed by the Southern people, as soon
as protection is guaranteed to them against the tyranny and usurpations
of the rebel influence. It is prophesied that there will be found a
heart in the bulk of the Southern population; that it will still cling
with affection and pride to that government which was their guarantee,
and which no power now on earth is competent to shake. It is not against
the deluded, the timid, or the helpless of the South that we would make
the indictment for political crime. It is the perfidious pro-slavery
spirit in politics that we seek to arraign.

The analysis of developed motives in which the slaveholders' rebellion
had its origin, must naturally excite the inquiry in the American mind,
as to how far the slaveholding element can be trusted. As a political
force, we find it sowing the seeds of political discontent. As an
anti-democratic element, we find it plotting the overthrow of democratic
government. In its efforts to denationalize republican government in
America, it has not scrupled to seek aid from, and alliance with, the
haters of republican institutions every where. Under such calamitous
teachings as it has inflicted, can we longer conclude that it can, from
its aptitudes and nature, be converted into an element of national
strength? There is a South, and a great South, and would continue to be,
were there not a negro or slaveholder sojourning there. The seven
millions non-slaveholding population in the Southern States have rights,
social and political, based on the motive to maintain republican
government. The Constitution of the Union, as the highest principle of
fundamental law, guarantees in express terms, to every State, the form
of a republican government; and not less by implication, the essential
qualities of an actual one. It matters not how much the non-slaveholding
population of the South may have been deluded, nor how much it may have
been incited, under that delusion, to act as the instrument of its own
overthrow. This population is not less the object of just political
solicitude than any equal number of people North. That its general
education has not been advanced to the appreciative point, is its
misfortune. That it has been surrounded by a pro-slavery influence,
selfish, arrogant, and contemptuous of the interest of the masses, is
equally so. That it has been less favored than its brother-hood of free
labor in the North--that it has been placed under disabilities in the
comparison, are only additional reasons for increased solicitude for the
welfare and future advancement of this portion of Southern population.
While it has been imposed upon, and much of it deluded in its motives to
action, its actual condition is in reality coupled with every natural
incentive to alliance and adhesion to the National Government. It has
drunk the bitter cup of calamity in rebellion. It has tasted the dregs
of treason that lie at the bottom of political vice, and been victimized
by destitution, by the diseases of camp-life, by the casualties of the
battle-field, and by the widowhood and orphanage that have followed the
train of rebellion. This population is a natural element of national
strength, having the same incentives as its brotherhood in the North.
Arms will soon remove the blockade to its intercourse with the North,
and civil liberty once established, will most likely secure it to the
side of national patriotism.

There is a question of equal magnitude respecting the colored
population, not only of the South, but of the whole country. It is
involved in the inquiry: Can the colored population be converted into an
element of national strength? Physiologically and mentally, the native
negro race stands as the middle-man in the five races--the Caucasian and
Malay being above, and the American aborigines and the Alforian below.
The mixture of blood with the Caucasian in America, places the negro
element of the United States at least upon a level with the Malay race
in natural powers, and from association, much the superior in practical
intelligence. Notwithstanding the crushing laws designed by slaveholders
to perpetuate the ignorance and helplessness of the negro, he _would_
improve. Notwithstanding the brutal and studied policy of slaveholders
to slander and disparage the negro capacity for improvement, all the
arts of lying hypocrisy have occasionally been set at naught by some
convincing exhibition of truth, springing from a fair experiment on the
colored man's susceptibilities. The white man's dishonoring inclination
to strike the helpless--made helpless by brutal laws--has occasionally
recoiled in an exposure of the atrocious practice. The late attempt to
introduce a bill into the South-Carolina Legislature, providing for the
sale of the free negroes of the State into slavery, led to a disclosure
worthy of contemplation. The Committee to whom the bill was referred
stated that--

'Apart from the consideration that many of the class were good
citizens, patterns of industry, sobriety, and irreproachable
conduct, there were difficulties of a practical character in the
way of those who advocated the bill. The free colored population of
Charleston alone pay taxes on $1,561,870 worth of property; and the
aggregate taxes reach $27,209.18. What will become of the one and a
half millions of property which belongs to them in Charleston
alone, to say nothing of their property elsewhere in the State? Can
it enter into the mind of any Carolina Legislature to confiscate
this property, and pot it in the Treasury? We forbear to consider
any thing so full of injustice and wickedness. While we are
battling for our rights, liberties, and institutions, can we expect
the smiles and countenance of the Arbiter of all events, when we
make war on the impotent and unprotected, enslave them against all
justice, and rob them of the property acquired by their own honest
toil and industry, under your former protection and sense of
justice?'[E]

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20