Tired of reading? Add this page to your Bookmarks or Favorites and finish it later.
|
|
The doctrine of State rights can be so handled by an adroit
demagogue as easily to confound the distinction between liberty
and lawlessness in the minds of ignorant persons, accustomed
always to be influenced by the sound of certain words, rather than
to reflect upon the principles which give them meaning. For,
though Secession involves the manifest absurdity of denying to the
State the right of making war against any foreign power while
permitting it against the United States; though it supposes a
compact of mutual concessions and guaranties among States
without any arbiter in case of dissension; though it contradicts
common-sense in assuming that the men who framed our
government did not know what they meant when they substituted
Union for confederation; though it falsifies history, which shows
that the main opposition to the adoption of the Constitution was
based on the argument that it did not allow that independence in the
several States which alone would justify them in seceding;--yet, as
slavery was universally admitted to be a reserved right, an inference
could be drawn from any direct attack upon it (though only in self-defence)
to a natural right of resistance, logical enough to satisfy
minds untrained to detect fallacy, as the majority of men always are,
and now too much disturbed by the disorder of the times, to
consider that the order of events had any legitimate bearing on the
argument. Though Mr. Lincoln was too sagacious to give the
Northern allies of the Rebels the occasion they desired and even
strove to provoke, yet from the beginning of the war the most
persistent efforts have been made to confuse the public mind as to
its origin and motives, and to drag the people of the loyal States
down from the national position they had instinctively taken to the
old level of party squabbles and antipathies. The wholly
unprovoked rebellion of an oligarchy proclaiming negro slavery the
corner-stone of free institutions, and in the first flush of over-hasty
confidence venturing to parade the logical sequence of their leading
dogma, "that slavery is right in principle, and has nothing to do with
difference of complexion," has been represented as a legitimate and
gallant attempt to maintain the true principles of democracy. The
rightful endeavor of an established government, the least onerous
that ever existed, to defend itself against a treacherous attack on its
very existence, has been cunningly made to seem the wicked effort
of a fanatical clique to force its doctrines on an oppressed
population.
|