The Sun.
London, England, 1862-06-25 00:00:00

NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA.

The following illustration in a mercantile form of
the :points at issue between the Northern and
Southern States of America presents a very clear
idea of the nature of the cause for which the pre-

sent unexampled waste of blood and treasure is
being carried on, to the horror of the civilised
world and the scandal of the 19th century :

" A commercial firm engages in business, they
provide for alterations in their articles of copartner-
ship, but, either from accident, expectation that the
firm will last the life of the partners, or that when
interest or difference of opinion make a dissolution
necessary or expedient, it will naturally take place,
they omit any limit of time, or any provision for
dissolution.
" The firm is prosperous, lasts many years, and
individual partners amass a capital equal, or nearly
equal, to the original capital of the firm. Differ-
ences of opinion also arise, till at length three of the
partners are satisfied that they cannot longer remain
in the firm without a sacrifice of feeling and interest.
" The question is how they are to get out ; the
five other partners, they know, will not consent„and
there seems to be nothing in the articles to enable
the minority to get clear of their associates, but to
be released they are determined at all hazards.
They proceed to the bankers and, by the powers of
signature they possess, they secure about what they
consider their portion of capital. They then an-
nounce to their five associates their determination
to dissolve ; they propose to constitute two firms,
and desire to continue on friendly terms, and if their
proposal is accepted they are ready to come back
with the money they have drawn, and have an
amicable settlement of funds, paying back in case;it
should prove they had drawn more than their share.
" The five partners are taken by surprise. They
point to the articles of copartnership to show that
the three have no warrant there for what they have
been doing, and, above all, inveigh against their
proceedings at the bankers'.
" The three claim that there being no provision
made for dissolution proves that the intention was
to leave any partner to go out when he conceived
it for his interest to do so, but they mean to go, at
any rate.
" Two courses are open to the five aggrieved part-
ners—to file a bill in Chancery to compel a return

of the V three, in which process, if they spend half
their own capital, they will have the satisfaction of
destroying the whole of that of the three, the result,
if successful, being to bring them back, with the
capital of the whole wofully diminished, and the
most bitter feeling engendered.
" The other course seems to be to accept the fact,

though, perhaps, refusing to acknowledge the right,
make the best bargain they can, each firm go on in
its own way, agreeing, in case of need, to support
each other in case of any attack from outside, and
be as good friends as they can be under existing
circumstances, the five trusting, not unreasonably,
to their superiority in capital and numbers to sur-
pass the three and perhaps make them eventually
beg for readmission.
" The above seems very much the condition of the
partnership of States in America, where 11 partners
out of 30 determine to get out."