The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-06-03
From the Charleston Is. o. NeuOs.
Union OF the south.

Union OF the south.
II South Carolina were to organize an indepcnd-
ent government, she would occupy most anom-
alous position. small Commonwealth in the
midst of an association of States-of them and not
10Th them--fnds no parallel in history. We defy
ingenuity describe the nature Of the relation OF
such Commonwealth to the States by which it
would be surrounded. Theory fails to reconcile
the conditions by which such political system
could subsist. 1t would be difficult to delineate
the character of those relations in peace in
AS regards the southern States generally, similar
in their internal polity, their proximity to in
dependent State would give rise to many questions
which public Law would not neutrality-suspicious.
which would place their feelings in oppo-
sition TO their obligations What tribunal would
decide those questions? II is the vaines Of expec
tations to look for the "married calm OF States
under such circumstances. The interfering claims
of commerce--questions Of boundary-personal
wrongs--spoliations beyond State liinits, debts,
reclamatons- are all prolific of hostility
They fill up the large measure Of those disputes that
frequently arm in deadly hostility cotermnous
States. Can it be shown from historical analogy
that a cluster of Commonwealths similar in their
internal structure-each exercising all the attri-
butes Of domestic police-must necessarily be har
monious if once disunited, in their external rela
tlOnB! Wneu states arc uuiecut ~ 40 uos eAh-
ply to preserve intact their internal arrange
ments one with another These will, by their in
herent powers Of assimilation, continue in their
integrity, unless assaulted from without. Associa-
ton, Union, is to resist outward pressure-to pre-
sent an entire, unbroken body polite on all matters
by which the members may, by possibility, come
into collision with each other or the whole collect
lively with foreign States. Between themselves
territorial disputes may unsettc their peaceful re-
Iatin h1t aupDliea understandable
fund Of conflicting pretensionsof jealousies that
are easily sharpencd into animosties II 10 noto-
rous that border States exhibit these on the largest
scale, and in the most aggravated form. Can't be
within tho scope of probability that because South
Carolina has now no causes of collision with her
neighbor. Georgia, in those things OF which they
partake in common, that they have no diverse in
ierests--no contrarent social traits that may, If
disunited, be fostered into hostility? This Is moro
than can be affirmed.
But we will concedc that no jeaouses oppo-
sition of interests-no border disputes-no rival
RIGS break the charm of peace that is supposed to
reside in States which united socially but di-
vided politically. How il system, with one in :
dependent State interposed, to practically operate
during a foreign war in certain contingencies.
Suppose South Carolina invaded. Suppose, with
out dcrogating from her valor, that the enemy,
having landed on part OF her coast is not 30 soon
expelled as would be consistent with the safety Of
one Of the adjoining States Georgia or North Caro-
lima Suppose protection is demanded of the com
mon authority, either of these from the real
or supposed pressure of danger, marches, with the
consent Of South Carolina, to repcl the enemy. The
troops of South Carolina and the militia of Georgia,
we will imagine, arc combined, from necessity, in
military operations. How are the movements to
lie guided by military authorities, derived from
different jurisdictions, which. if they do not con-
hict, open sources of constant collision? How u
unity to be obtained in such operations! How are
the charges of war, the commissariat, &C., to be
adjusted with the concurrence OF the central au-
thorty, without the chances Of endess controversy
How IL all this risk of complication to be avoided!
It is not to be imagined that an enemy would be
permitted to effect Judgment in the heart OF the
Union without efforts to displace him, although 1t
should be within the territory of State that has
resumed it's sovereignty. Tho country must be
preserved in its territorial integrity, II even dis
less than this. Now how, we agnin AJAX, are the
conflicting jurisdictions, which must mar military
operations, to be rcconsied How are the numer-
Gus questions to be adjusted involved in these mea
surcs of protection and defence? How, in short, ia
war to be conducted without the concentration of
authority?
We are not now speaking of the South counsel
ling, esolving, acting together, independently,
but as integral part of the Union, not yet pre-
pared to cast of its obligations to the Confedera-
cy, and resume its sovereignty, with the excep-
ton of South Carolina Until SO prepared, the se-
cession of South Carolina would place her, we re-
scheme of public duty-no system OF international
obligation with which acquainted-no
theory Of confederatcd government within the
range of political experiment or historical example
II would place the other southern States in an
equally false attitude towards South Carolina, set
ting their duty, their inclination, their sympathies,
in anita gonism to their political engagements