Newspaper Page Text
., t, I : c
. '' :. '!
... I: t I .!
BENJAMIN S. JONES, EDITOR.
"NO UNION WITH SLl TEHOLDERS."
' ANN PEARSON, PUBLISHING AO EXT.'
VOL. 16. NO. 32.
SALEM, COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OHIO, SATURDAY, MARCH 23, 1801.
WHOLE NO. 800
THE AHTISLUERY BUGLE,
riJBLUUID EVEBT BATUBPAT AT tALIM, OOIO;
By the Ezeoutiv Committee, of the Western Anti-
TERMS. $1.50 per annum payable in advance.
ggyCommunioation intended for insertion, to
be addressed to Bikjahih S. Jokes, Editor.
Order for the paper and letter containing
taiooey in payment for the same.'ahould be addros
ed to Ann Peabsoh, Publishing Agent, Salem,
olumbiana County, Ohio.
tgy-Money carefully enveloped and directed as
. above, may be sent by mail at onr risk.
BTWe occasionally send numbers to those who
'are not subscribers, but who are believed to be
interested in the dissemination of Anti-Slavery
truth, with the hope that they will either subscribe
themselves or use their influence to extend its
oiroulation among their friends.
TERMS OF ADVERTISING
One Square, (16 lines) three weeks,
" " Eaoh additional insertion,
" " Six month,
One year, -Two
Square six months,
' " One year, - -
One Fourth Column one year, with privilege
of changing monthly, - 12.00
Half Column, changing monthly, - 20.00
' gpCards not exceeding eight line will be in
eerted one year for $300; six months, $2 00.
Igy-Advertisemente for patent medicines, speci-
Co remedies, chance to make money, Ac., neither
olieited nbr published.
. t. "BUD80H, PBIVTZR.
The Anti-Slavery Bugle.
A NORTHERN PLEA
RIGHT OF SECESSION.
BY GEO, W. BASSETT, OTTAWA, ILLINOIS.
The great event of the day and of the world, ie
the formal dissolution of the Amorioan Union.
But, secession, the exciting phenomenon, is only
the fatal issue of a cbronio disease, as old a the
nation. The seeds of dissolution were planted in
the American Government at it formation.
Long before the South Carolina ordinanoe of se
cession, was this Union of States destroyed in
rpirit and in practice. The law which obligate
'-- in 'State and their citizen to each 'ether,' have
been practical! v nullified for year. While a eiti-
teo of Massachusetts, or- of any other Northern
State, can travers the whole wid extent . of the
British Empire, and, whatever his color, oreed oi
- 'condition at home, hie natural rights be as firmly
proteoted as those of the Queen on ber throne; the
moment be crosses the line whioh divides the slave
front ie non-slave States, he is subject to indigni
" ties and lawless outrage, unsurpassed by the sol
fish cruelty of the most wild and inhospitable bar-.
barians. . , . .
It is a humiliating thought, that there is no
power in the civilised world that could protect the
life of the President elect, though uncharged with
civil crime, were be . now to attempt to pass
. through the Slave Slate of this Republic.
The mere ordinance of a misguided State, there
fore, is not the cause of the dissolution of the
' American Union. A more potent agenoy has long
since wrought the fatal work, beyond the remedy
of civil or military power. .
' But the formal separation of the States, so long
increasingly probable, has at length become a
matter of history. The spirited State of South
Carolina has led the way, and by the highest aot
of popular sovereignty, formally repealed the or
dinance of 1788, whereby the Constitution of the
United States of Amerioa was ratified, and bus
thus dissolvei ber Union with tbe other State of
One star, followed by another and another
and other still, have fled from tbe American
Whether there is any legitimate or illegitimate
power able to seise and replace them again, and
bind tbem in their former and formal courses of
re'.uotant submission, is tbe question of the times.
It is to th'e candid and deliberate consideration
of this question, that I now ask attention.
An exigency bas occurred in the history of onr
oonntry, which require the guidanoe of funda
mental principle and tbe prompting of a mag
nanimous spirit. Without original and profound
view of the principles of government, we shall
find ourselves bewildered at every point. Nay! we
nay fancy that we are incidentally advancing the
cause of freedom, when, in fact, by obeying the
diotates of prejudice and following the precedent
of the past, w may bo forcing chain for our
selves, and strengthening those which bate so
long bound tbe Negro slave.
" . It may be thought strange that, with my well
known hostility to American Slavery,together with
the almost unanimous anti-secession feeling of the
North, I should, In this specific controversy, take
the side of the South.
But it is not in the enslavement of her poor,
that I sid with ber; but in ber Inalienable right
of national sovereignty.
Tbe greater question of the existence of slavery
I a distinct matter, and, if involved at all. verv
differently, la my apprehension, from that of the
popular mind generally al the North. Nor have I
failed to give due consideration to that greatest of
THE QUESTION STATED.
The speoifio question is, "Bat any one of lie
Unite Stale a right to secede from the Union at
her own option t"
This should not be confounded with .other collat
eral or incidental questioas, such a, whether there
1 sufficient cause for secession ! or whether it is
expedient for tbe .seeding- State. ! or b.st for the
ewer oiaies j r - . j, ...
I propose to discus the absolute and Unqualified
rtght of the people of any Btate U dissolve their po
Ulieat connection with the Centred Oovernmtni when
ever meg entott, ' v , v .; ;
The right of secession ' implies, of coarse, tbe
right of the people to be tiuir own exoluslve judg
es in the matter. By the very aot of Bikini- the
consent or permission of the other States to seoede
they relinquish the right to do so. 8o by
grabting them that permission, you would
deny them the right. Say Furgason,
"Liberty is a right whioh every individual
must be ready to vindicate for himself, and which
he who pretends to bestow as a favor, has by that
very act in reolity denied." .
Before entering opon tbe direot argument for
the right of State secession, and as prepaiatory to
it, I will invite attention briefly to the great fun
damental principle of free government, vis : The
political supremacy of the people of any given ter
ritory over all human authority, eubjeel only to nat
ural justice. A due consideration of the nature
and legitimate object of government will make
this ptinoiple obvious to reason. The true nature
of government is the will of the people governed,
voluntarily expressed and enforced by themselves.
Its object is protection from injustice. Tbe trne
idea of govermnent is, that of a mutual, league of
such persons as may voluntarily unite to protect
each other against lawless and vicious men. One
mm is not naturally more a ruler than another.
The people of any community as a whole are en
dowed with natural sovereignty. Tbev alone are
interested, and of course they alone are the prop
er authors of laws, and tbe oreator of magis
trates. Hence they are politically superior to all
constitutions, compacts, law or magistrates. Mag
istrates are only the bfred. servants of the sover
eign people, which they may discharge at will.
Laws and constitutions are only tbe decrees of the
people, which tbe makers are competent to annul
or change at will.
This principle is clearly recognized in our own
immortal Declaration of Independence in these
words: "Whenever any form of government be
comes destructive of these ends, it is the right of
the people to alter or to abolish it. and to institute
a new government, laying its foundation on such
principles, and organising its powers in such form,
as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
safety and happiness." And this declaration was
made "in tbe name and by the authority of the
good people of these colonies," and our own glo
rious Revolution was the practical commentary up
on this great principle of popular supremacy.
The same bas been abundantly enunciated by
the wisest of English statesmen, and exemplified
by the most exalted instances of patriotio devotiou
and valor. t
The pr'ofoondest of England's political pbifoso-
phers, aud tbe most revered of ber patriots, tbe
great Algernon Sidney, says, "that tbey who place
the power In a multitude, understand a multitude
composed of freemen, yho think it for their conve
nience to join together, and to establish such laws
and rules as tbey oblige themtelvet to observe;
which multitude, whether it be great or small,
has tbe tame right; because ten men are as free
as ten millions; and though It may be more pru
dent in some cases (o join with the greater than
the smaller number, because there is more
strength, it is not so always; but however every
man must therein be bis own judge1, since if he'
mistake, the hurt is only to himself; end tbe ten
may at justly resolve to live together, form a civil
society, and oblige themselves to laws, a tbe
greatest number of men that ever met together ia
This clear, profound, and comprehensive propo
sition, expresses the great fundamental principle
of civil liberty, and lies at tbe foundation of all
freo governments, whatever their form. It was
enunciated by one of the world's greatest philoso
pher, aud truest heroes, and was endorsed by his
life and sealed with his blood upon tbe scaffold of
tyranny, which Is indeed the scaffold of glory.
But it is constantly being overlooked and lost from
tbe popular mind. The people are ever forgetting
their natural sovereignty, with its natural advan
tages and responsibilities, and paying a blind de
votion to some form of tyranny which they rever
ence under the name of government, and most
blindly and most devoutly those plausible tyran
nies which are exercised ia their own name and
authority. , .
But on a point so vital and fundamental, I
would refer to another of tbe intellectual giants
of tbe 17th century. It is John Milton, tbe mag
nificenoe and profoundness of whose political wri
tings are hardly surpassed by the unequalled
grandeur of the Paradise Lost. lie says, "that
since tbe king or magistrate holds bis authority of
tbe people, both Originally and naturally for their
good, in the first plaoe, and not hit own, then may
the people a oft a they ehtU judge It for tbe best,
either choose bim or reject him or depose bim.
though no tyrant, tnerelg by (he liberty and right
of free born men, to be governed a stems to them
best." - : v
These majestic truth bave stood tbe test of ages
of hostile power and popular prejudioe.' They
are truly immortal. They may be forgotten in
the .elfish gratification of a degenerate, mercena
ry, and servile - ege. Tbey may be eolipeed
by tbe dazzling glitter of aristooratio wealth and
power, but tbey are imperishably enshrined with
the richest jewels of the world's literature. There
will they ever remain, for the encouragement of
tbe patriot, and tbe guide and inspiration of the
beroee of Liberty. ' .
Again, onr own great Jefferson, a. late as 1810,
in arguing against lbs supremacy and independ
ence of any one department of government, eays,
"that absolute independence can be trnsted no
where but with the people, en mats. They are
independent of all but moral law."
lis re I an admirable expression of both tbe ex
tent and limit of popular supremacy. The people
are competent to any political act that i not mor
ally nnjusl. But tbey posses no eovereign right
to do wrong. They are independent of all but
moral law. No antiquity of authority no ex
tent or number no solemnity of legal form,
nor majesty of judioiel decisions, nor sanctity of
religions oeto, can authorise tbe perpetration of
moral wrong-e&a joetify a Sbylook In taking
tbe covenanted pound of flesh. -It
i. chimed that a numerical majority bave a
right to rule end to enforce their decrees. But
nothing is mor erroneous. Tbe Southern states
men are right in principle in denying tbe absolute
supremacy of the majority. Majorities posses no
legitimate authority to do wrong. There oan be
no legitimate authority to do moral wrong, be.
cause right is immutable, and eternally end un
conditionally obligatory. Right ie the unchanging
decree of the Supreme Being.
If a majority enacts and enforces a moral
wrong, it is nothing less nor more than tyranny;
and no tyrannies are to irresponsible and onoon-
trollable as those of a majority; and no political
thraldom I eo degrading a that which 1 self-
It is plain, therefore, that ovrelgnty cease
with the transgression .of natural justice. Then
the sovereign, wbethor a monarch or a tyrannical
majority, becomes himself the culprit, and justly
subject to any righteoue power that may restrain
him. "Justice," eays Milton, "is the sword oj
God superior to all mortal things, in whose hand so
ever, by apparent signs, his testified will it to put
But this popular supremacy, of course, involves
also popular responsibility. Government ie not a
mere selfish interest, but a bigb and sacred trust.
Tbe legitimate end of government is to prevent in
justice. The sovereign people are therefore tbe
responsible guardians of civil juatice and human
rightr. This responsibility, in any given ease, is
measured by physical power. Human enaotmente
being tbe mere creatures or acts of tbe people, are
not, of ooorse, tbe true measure of their responsi
bility. Tbe sovereign people bave no more right
to suffer injustice, than to do it. It is a betrayal
or neglect of tbeir trust. They are the divinely
constituted and legitimately authorised guardians
of human rights over such territory as tbey may
actually occupy; and for the faithful discharge of
the function of political supremacy, God and hu
manity will hold them responsible.
Of no priooiple of political philosophy is histo
ry more replete with beautiful and glorious exam
plea, than this of popular supremacy. The
gloomy annals of human thraldom are relieved
and gladdened by innumerable instances of its, he
It was the presiding genius of Roman destiny
in all the brilliant progress of that wonderful peo
ple from an iron monarchy to the achievement of
a system of republican freedom, which baa been
tbe pride, stimulant and model of the race ever
since, xue same principle, also, bas ever, presi
ded over the developemeot. of tbat palladium of
human freedom, Jhe British Constitution, Aod
to-day, in bolu bemi.pberes. It is tbe aimigbty an
gel of Liberty, commissioned of God, and moving
about among the cations, demolishing thrones,
changing dynasties, crushing despotisms, and
everywhere demanding the inauguration of the
reign of jostiou and equal right.
Thus it appear that supreme political power
inheres in tbe people o any given territory, that
tbey bavo tbe right to do politically whatever is
not in its nature unjust. Tbey may form, modify,
or abolish their government ae shall seem best to
their own judgment, restrioted of course by "jua
tice," which, as Milton .ays, "it the only true sov
ereign and supreme majesty upon earth,"
It is, simply, the great natural right of selj-gov-
ernment, " ' '
From this fundamental truth of political philos
ophy, I infer tbe right of South Carolina, or any
other State of tbe American Confederacy, to se
cede from the Union, at tbeir own option.
This corollary from tbe principle of popular su
premacy, I propose further to illustrate, sanction,
and enforce, by euch consideration as are sugges
ted by the present national exigency.
THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED ESSENTIAL.
Our government, aa ia well known, owes its ori
gin to tbe declaration tbat ."government derive
tbeir just powers from tbe consent of tbe govern
ed." If, therefore, South Carolina with
draw ber consent from the United States
Government, where Is your just power to
govern hert I wish I bad a logical an
swer to tbat question before I advanoe another
etep in my argument, Jt aeema indisputably evi
deut to my mind, tbat all your just power or au
thority to govern her i nullified by such withhold
ing of consent. Not only the American Union,
but any and all other legitimate government are
destroyed by tbe withdrawal of tbe popular con
sent. This, aooording to tbe Declaration of Inde
pendence, ie all tbat ie necessary ' to effect tbe
proper dissolution of any government.'
What is the object of a government f Simply
the protection of tbe people. But if tbe people do
not consent to receive such protection any pow
er affords, what reason is there in enforoing it up
on themt If political authority ie exercised ever
a people, by taxation, direot or indirect, either by
a revenue oflioer or a oommon publican, or in any
other way, without tbeir consent, it is only usur
nation, and not legitimate authority. Tour ad-!
ministration may not be tyrannical or oppressive
it may even be fatally lag and indulgent to
crime; but without tbe consent of the governed, It
ie usurpation, end unwarrantable either on tbe
principles of our own government, or any sound
principles of political philosophy, even though
it be beneficent in Us aims. But on tbl point let
me quote again from an authority of whom an ap
preciative world will never tire. Milton say:
They that shall boast, a we do, to be a tree na
tion, and not bave in themselves tbe power to re
move or to abolish any governor, supreme or sub
ordinate, with the government Use upon urgent
causes, may please tbeir fancy with a ridiculous
and painted freedom, fit to cozen babies, but are
indeed under tyranny and servitude, a wanting
tbat power, whioh It the root and eouroe or all lib
erty, to dispose and economise in the land whioh
God bath given them.at master oi laniuy, in men
own boube and tree Inheritance, without wbiob,
natural and essential power of a free nation,
thoocb bearing high their beads, they oan In due
esteem be thought no better than .lave and ves
sels born, in the tenure and occupation of another
inheriting lord, whose government, though nof UUr
aal n intolerable, bange over them as a lordly
scourge, not a mfrte government, and therefor to
Now I ask, ars tbese worde of might and gran
deur the senseless raving of a revolutionary fa
d.iio, or loe philosophical apprehensions of a pro
found and world-renowned statesmen' Have tbey
not, like angelie powers, stood ..nim.l i th
of Freedom, and defied tbe combined attsoke of i
despotism and servility for more tbaa two hundred'
years? And it is (gaiost this principle of popular
supremacy, before whose im
of usurping dyn.sties beve laid down their seep.
" u" wratueted government proposes to
rush, in coercing a seceding State. We propose
jta IL.A . t . .
m i. without her consent! What I
this but the re-enactment of tbe identical tragedy
"uru aortn s attempt to subdue the American
Coloniest Wbyl even tbe British Government, la
the more enlightened parte of her domain, baa
or quite abandoned that principle. Why
else does the premier alwaye feel constrained to
resign his office, when bis measures are defeated
In the popular branch of tbe Legislators! It ie
nothing less than a most significant acknowledg
ment of tbe practical triumph of popular eupiema-
cy. The very throne ol free England ie eappoeed
to reflect tbe sentiment of the English people
How long eould it endure the light of thie age if it
did not? So dominant is thie sentiment ia the En
glish mind, that if Canada or British Columbia
should to-day vote to beoome an independent Re-
poDiio, a war to reconquer her would doubtless
serioosly endanger the British throne. It i. too
late in the day to carry out tbat nriooinle. In co
ercing South Caroline, or any of ber seceding
compeors, you would violate the most aenroved
sentiments of modern Europe, and go back for
your precedents to the grand despotisms of Louis
XIV. Of France, and the tyrannical usurpations of
James ll. or England. Even Louie Napoleon
owe his imrerial sceptre directly or iodireeJy to
twenty millions of popular votes; and almost every
breeze from tbe classiolaod of Italv bring, to our
gladdened ear. the oraab of some boary dynasty,
tnat pas fallen before tbe imperial march of popu
Coerce South Carolina to submit to a foreign
government, and yoo tear the well-earned laurels
from the brow of the brave and unconquerable
Garibaldi. You re-inforee tbe tyrannical garrisons
of Rous and forge new manaelee for ber bleeding
patriot!. You pour contempt and ioeull upon
your nation's late eloquent and distinguished
guest, Jjnd give tbe rigbt hand ef fellowship to
tsamjrjjyln ber subjugation of Hungary and ber
other 4aatirfied provinces. Tbe doctrine of tbe
eoerciih'of an unwilling pcoDle. is an antiauatad
dogma. tyranny, and U nothing less than the
. . . . ,
old ecosrc of men. "the divine riahtot ' Kinas.
I will tvsn Invoke Imperial RuMia, hardly out ef
her childhood of civilization, to rebuke tbe recre
mcy of the American Repoblio to the great ob
ject of all revolutionary struggle and .aorifioee
tbe real political policy of the people. .. ..
Let i Le understood, and even remembered, and
rung through tbe world, to the rebuke of all ty
ranny, tbat government is a duty and not an inter
est. There is no divine right of King. There is
a divine duly. Kor any more ie there a divine
right of Presidents ae such. Strictly speaking,
government baa no right. It bas dutiee to per
form simply. Its whole objeot is to protect men
in their rights, "Security against wrong," eays
Mackintosh, "is tbe objeot of all government."
There is, therefore, a divine right of tbe people,
but not of magistrate aa such. Say Milton, "to
say, as ia usual, tbe king hatb as good a right to
hie crown and dignity aa any man to hi inheri
tance, ie to make tbe subject no better than the
kiag slave, bie chattel, or his possession, tbat
may be bought and sold;" and be add that, to
affirm thie doctrine, "ie a kind of treason against
the dignity of mankind." . And surely it ia equal
Iy absurd and improper for the people of one sec
tion of tbe country to advanoe a olaim of rigbt to
the political allegiance of those of another section,
The most arrogant pretention of ancient royalty,
are not mere preposterou.
FREEMEN NOT SUBJECTS BUT SOVEREIGNS.
Again, the word .object itself expresses a rank
political heresy, and ie unworthy to be applied to
an American oitiaenw
According te tbe true theory of our government
and of all free or popular government, tbe peo
ple are -not (object, but eovereign. Tbey ar
tbsmseWee tbe government the supreme political
tribunal. Government ia ourselves, freely acting
in a political capacity, for tbe sole purpose of pro
tecting .ewreelvee against Jawle violence and
freed. Our object ie not to tubject ourselves to
political authority, but le protect ourselves by our
own inherent and inalienable political authority.
The American people bave beoome so degenerate
nder the influence of tbeir long aod aggravated
violation ef the prinoiplee of liberty, tbat tbey
seam quite incapable of forming a conception of
the trne theory of government and tbe right of
ate. But the sentiment of a tree politioal philo
sophy is, "that the law ia not made for a righteoue
man, but for the lawlese and disobedient, for tbe
ungodly and for einaere, for unholy and profane,
for murderers of father, and aaurdtrer. ef motherr
for etantlayer. For whoremonger, for them tbat
defile themselves with mankind, for nan-etealere,'
for liar, for perjured persons, and If there be any
other thing tbat ia contrary to eoand doctrine,'
i. ., aay other form of ties. It ie n humiliating
nougat unworthy of tbe true dignity of human
nature, that an immortal man, erected in tbe im
age of his Maker, ebould require U Ve oebjeeted
to tbe authority of eotne earthly potentate, to pre
vent bie committing crime ageinet eoeietyl I hope,
therefore, that the ignoble word eubjeot will be
forever discarded from the vocabulary of thoee
wbo maintain the slightest element of eolf-respcet,
ot conscious virtue. Beal virtue will be subject to
no human authority. II nobly scorns Ih idea.-'
It U eubjeet only to the supreme authority of right.
ItecouiMce inhuman authority, nej, ezercucs it
egainst the vicious but ie subject only to right.
Is it true that men pay tbeir debts because tbey
ere obliged to by bnman authority Tbea I rank
them with whoremongers and men-etealers, wheth
er in the eburob erout, I it tree tbat men are
detened from murder, theft and ether crime by
human governments! It limply prove tbem mor
COERCION IN USURPATION.
But let us return to tbe point. What right bas
the United States Government to impose its au
thority upon the unwilling people of South Cat-
ollna, or any of her Southern compeer.? or rather.
what right bave ere, the combined people of tbe
other State, to govern the unwilling people
tboe states' I our motive protection tbe only
legitimate object of government? None will pre-
tena It, u we duly analyse tbe matter, we
shall see tbat it It only tbe old, long-exploded,
and detestable dootrloe of the divine right of kings
in a new form. It ie true tbat we are not one king
or eovereign, but w are a nation of them. We
are not one usurper, but a people of usurpers. For
it i nothing les than nsurpatian to exercise polit
ical authority over sn unwilling people. It i the
essence of usurpation exercising authority
which legitimately belongs te another. Nor does
the Republican form and name of (he authoriiv
dimiaish the enormity of tbe crime against hu
THE COLLECTION OF THE REVENUE.
Suppose we simply oolleot the revenue of Sooth
Caroline, es tbe Government proposes to do, and
ae the people generally demand and claim the
rigbt to do, what is she any longer, I ask, but a con
qoered provincef and what ie your revenue but
forced tribute! What else did Borne, whose ex
ample we eeem to be following, even do to van
quished and bumbled Carthage, or to any of her
conquered provinoes! What more did Alexander,
or the great Napoleon, but to oolleot en involun
tary tribute from unwilling victims of tbeir victo
rious arms! I bear it every day gravely main
tained and with apparent eiacerity, by many of
the Northern citizens, and they catch it from our
members of Congress, tbat we do not Intend to
conquer Sooth Carolina, but only to collect ber
revenue, and probably blockade ber port and
keep possession of the military posts! Bat does
any intelligent person fail to see tbat tbat is the full
extent of political subjugation? Taxation, direot
or indirect, is one of tbe highest funotions of sov
ereignty, and to blocked a port, I one of the
most belligerent of eote. It i truly ridiculous
for grave member of Congress to disclaim any
purpose of conquest or war, when they advocate
the extreme measures of military hostility. j
COERCION ITSELF DESTRUCTION OF THE GOVERNMENT.
When you successfully collect an involuntary and
resisted revenue from to port of Charleston, or
any other port within tbe geographical limits of
South Caroline, her sovereignty is destroyed, as
really at' tbat of Carthage after the sad termin
ation of the third Punio war.
But remember, that when South Carolina fall,
the falls not alone. Tbe suicidal band which
stikes down the sovereignty of the people of South
Carolina, demolishes that of Massachusetts with it,
aod tbe wbole fabric of American Liberty falls by
tbe same stroke. Then not one star escapes from
tbe galaxy of free sovereignties, but all are blotted j
out by this sweeping stroke of despotio usurpation, 1
We are no longer a voluntary confederation of
sovereign States, but each and all of us conquered
provisoes of a centralized and consolidated des
potism. We of tbe North maybe voluntary in
this subjugation, like the more degraded of slaves
yea, we may be tbe unnatural agent of it; but
it is subjection still.
Truly bas it been .aid, that a people may lose
their liberties a cebtury before tbey become aware
of the faot. And it is to be feared tbat we shall
be conjugated to despotism ia the very name of
liberty. I am impressed with the oonviotion that
the American people are not aware of tbe drift of
passing and prospective event. All history is one
great warning and remonstrance against our pro
posed ooorse. What if it ia South Carolina that
ie oonquered now ! It may be Massachusetts
celt I know that slavery complains tbe most to
day, but liberty may be tbe next victim, if, indeed
it is not even now to be the real victim.
It eeems evident to my mind that, instead of tbe
acknowledgment of the right of eeoeeeion being
the destruction of the government, the practical
application of tbe doctrine of coercion ia, ittelf,
both the destruction of the government and the
efficient eause of socession.
Iti. the destruction of the government, beoause
it is a political revolution. It is a change of tbe
whole spirit of tbe government, from a confedera
cy of sovereign States, held together by mutual in
terest and common attachment ,W a consolidated
empire, bound together by military force.
It ie also, to come extent, an efficient cause
of tbe present dissolution of the Union,
It it the belligerent doctrines and attitude of tbe
dominant politioiane of tbe North, which bave
precipitated thie movement of secession. If tbe
right of eeoeoeien bad been conceded at tbe first,
the movement would bave been deprived of its es
sential vigor and iutensensss. Tbe people, feel
ing that they bad a conceded right to icoede at
will, would naturally nave delayed an act so fear'
lully pregnant with poesible evil. They would
ba-e given themselves time to fully eonsiasr tbe
eubjeet in all it beariage and poesible consequen
ces. Nor could ee many Statee have been iaduced
to folic tbe momentous experiment in ooch hasty
sooeceeton. ll le very aouuuei it me moveuceoi
eould have been effected at all, If the rigbt to make
it bad not been denied. But the righl wee denied
with threat of coercion, and tbe people of tbe
clave State eaw impending over iheat a politioal
domination which, if iu dootrini. were oaried out.
would deeiioy their legitimate eovereigntjnd re-
daoe these te tbe condition of conquered province
of Tolitical slaves. Tbey wet, therefore, driven
to tbe fearful experiment of secession by the neoet-
eitisc ot tbeir contested and endangered rights.
TESTIMONY OF THE FATHERS.
Tbl. very reeult wee distinctly predicted by our
political lathers, as the neeeeeary coasoqoenoe of
thie doctrine of force a apptieuw eeyereign
State- Mr. Madison .aid, "The nee ot foroe
againat a Bute would "look more liken declara
tion ef wit than an infliction of punishment," ana
would be eoneidered by tbe party attacked aa
dissolution of all "previous oompacte by which
might be bound.' Mr. Hamilton, the well known
and able tdvocaU of a .trong goietnment, aits
"How can this force be exerted on tbe Statet eel
lccti-)t ? It is impossible. It amounts to a ssev
betscceh the parties-," adding also thie prophetic)
declaration, tbat "a dissolution of the Union wifl
CoL Mason eaid,"Tbe most jarring element ef
nature, fire an't water themselves, are not mot
incompatible than euch a mixture of civil liberty
and military execution. Will tbe militia mar)
from one Stete Into another ia order to eolleet
tbe tax from tbe delinquent member ot the
Republic! Will they maintain an army for thin
purpose? Will not tbe citizen of tbe inreded
Statee assist one another, till (hey rise at one xeaa
end (hake off tbe Union altogether V
What delusive spell is npon our dominant pot
itioians, that they ebal their. eyee to tbe clear light
of other days, and attempt to manage the affaire)
of a mighty bnt distracted nation, with their ow
mind embarrassed with ignorance, and enveloped
in the cloud of party passion and prejudioe t
Where, under tbe lead of eoob political quackery
find utter selfishness; ie tbe nation drifting T
Milton says of tbe political managers of bie dsy,
"bow to eodder, bow to etop a leak, bow to keep
np the floating carcase of a crasy and diseased
monarohy or Slate, betwixt wind and water, wim
miog (till npon her own dead leee, thai now ie the
deep design of a politician !"
It seem. a. if the prophetio philosopher, when
be penned tbat description, bad in hie eye the very
politioal tinker, of Washington in eighteen ben
drcd and sixty-one.
It needs broader views, loftier aims, and bolist
purposes to guide tbe statesman amidst the etorue
and darkness ef political and civil convulsion,
when the great pillars of the government reel an
der the strokes of revolutionary violence, than
merely to manage a political party in aa ordinary
oontest for the epoilrof office.
Tbese are timee wbiob require not merely polit
ical ounning, but profound statesmanship. Tbey
demand te triumph and control of tbe great prln
oiplei of permanent and unchanging truth.
THE CASE REVERSED.
Soppose tbe ease reversed, and, instead of Seetift
Caroiioajesiring to accede from the Union, for
UJV UOiVM V. 11.1.' J, WW
wieh to secede, for tbe ioteieste of liberty. Sere
pose tbe people of tbe latter ebould feel cjotreeietv.
tlously bound to wV'.fadvaw political fellowship and
complicity with elavery, and to exeroiee tbeir V
oral sovereignty iu a just, humane, and import!
system ot government, would it aot be oppreee
Ion to coerce ber te remein ! Would not the cess
bined tyranny of thirty-three coercing Steiec be
more Intolerable despotism than any single iyraatl
Would it not be oppression for she general gov
ernment to oollecl an involuntary tribute been M
unwilling State, te support a government whees
flag protects not only tb crime of elavery bu tbe
African (lev trade it-elf! Nor ie tbe ease St eU
improbable, if even Massachusetts ie not wholly
corrupt by the progressive degeneracy W sou
timee. Even now the government of the united
State is deemed intolerably oppressive by the
best citizens of Massachusetts and teeny ef tb
tbe other Northern State. There ie not a foes ef
oil within tb wide domain of onr Republic,
where persecution for righteousness' eaks i set
the dominant principle. Fine, and imprieonsteue
follow with fearful certainty the holiest set ef
Christian charity. Tbe friend ot liberty and
free conscience should be careful bow they eane
tlon a principle against South Carolina, which)
may bave equal power against the holiest intetinet
of humanity in the people of the Northern States.
IS SECESSION CONSTITUTIONAL?
I am asked if there ie eny provicion in tbe Con
stitution of tbe United State, for the eeeeetion of
a State from tbe Union ! I reply, manifestly e4
of course not. No government can contemplate
itt own dissolution. Governments are formed fat
aotion aad not cessation. We must not, there
fore, look for eny positive warrant for dissolution)
in the Constitution itself. But I trace thie war
rant to a fir higher, holier, and more authorita-
ve eouroe than the Constitution of the Uaalesl
State. It i a right inherent in tb divine sonso
tution of human nature, and anterior to nil
man constitutions. As Senator Benjamin, In bis
las) Senatorial effort, well and truly eaid, "it is BA
herant inalienable right." It is nothing lest
than tbe great natural right of eelf-govrnneut.
hioh I onlv iclf proieciion. I read It la list e
vine image that imperial sapereoription, stamped
non tbe heart of man in bit creation, ny wnioa
k ia Wn a sovereign and not a .object. I recog
niie it in the constitutional politioal supremacy of
the people, whioh ie fatal alike to coniederaieo
espousm and chattel slavery.
THE RIGHT OF REVOLUTION.
But this, I am told, le the rigbt ef Revolution,
and that ia conoeded. Well, if thi it eon cede.
all that I essential is soneeded. If tb people of
any territory bave the natural right of revolution,
it can not be tbe right of any power te put tbst
revolution down. Tbe natural right el men eats
never eonfliot Tbe right of revolution, and tee
right of the uppreeston of the seme, eannne e
exiiL Senator Wad, la Bounding lbs bugle,
blast of that civil war wbiob now threatens te cou
vulsa and desolate the land, concedes the right sf
revolutiea, nnd ay. if oeesfttl, tb revoluttee.
ists srs beroee. But be maintain the eo-csteltat
right of tb general government to put then dww
by force, and it eueoeetiul, le constitute ins revo
lutionists traitors inttead of beroee ; and was
number of Northern politieane bave followed hit) .
lead. But what ie this sentiment but tbat old Mbs
istio monster, tbat "might males right.- Tb
sentiment is altogether unworthy of eJvUisatisel
end true philosophy. :.
Thi rigbt of revolution, wbiob barmy nay
Amerioan oillzen can be ee inconsistent as te d
ny In theory, ie only the natural and labereAt
rigbt of eeir-gevernmeni.
Sir Thomas Smith, aa eminent unties Buses. .
man, In bis Commonwealth of England, nays si
revolution, er ot rising sgalaet a tyrant, rAi ia
vulgar judge ofU euoording ioie , end $M
i. .1 .... .rt)..-. ilril Jm 14
learned meoordia Is the purpose f them tkateUU."
Tiera pa tat it, If you srs taooenfui, at Ve4j