Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1851-06-26
For TIE ApYERTisER.
EFFECTS OF SEPARATE STATE SECESSION
ON OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS GENERALLY.

FOR THE hDfENTlSER
EFFECTS OF SEPARATE STATE SECESSION
ON OUR FOREIGN RELATIONS GENERALLY.
N1Ucn has been said Of "outward pressure"
destroying the commerce, and endangcrng the
slave institution of South Carolina in case Of her
independence. The question has been approach
cd with too little regard to its practical bearing.
How will our commerce be affected except by
open WARP Suppose the general government
should shut up all the United States ports against
us--cut off our internal trade with the States
and, in legislative bountics. discriminate in favor
of the Seaport Towns Of our ncighboring States ::
would all this seriously injurc our commerce,
while European ports shall be open to us Could
we not easily dispose of all our exports, and re-
ccve every commodity we may DESIRE in the
Towns and Cities of Europe, or at places under
control of European powers England France,
Holland, tile West and East Indies, will supply
us with everything We may wish, and The three
former would be anxious to enlist Il large portion
or even the whole Of our carrying trade. Would
United States ships of war dare disturb the vcs-
srls oc these countries in passing to and from our
harbors? This would arouse the Indignation of
the civilized world It would unite half Of Europe
in war against the Federal Union. Let us cx-
pect no such folly. The practical wisdom Of the
day will be moro considcrate. Nothing Of the
sort could take place unless in state Of war.
Should any nation, in the mero wantonness Of
power, insult or disturb us "a thing little likely to
occur) we should have ample guaranty of protcc-
ton in our own strength. and in the alliance we
could at any time form with friendly powers, in
tercs!ed in preserving peace and comfy between
nations.
But to what does this argument tend? Does
it not practically deny the ability ofslnall States
to exist without being pcrpctually harrassed and
devourcd by the larger nations Of the world 2
ACCORDING, To .!ot no.ion, the rule Of cfiilized
would be that of savage, nations-"thc strongest
arm Of the strongest man" would be the con-
trolling element of power. II would place small
nations completely ut the mercy Of large ones, as
the small fish Of the sea arc at the mercy Of the
large FISH. This is to argue against the moral
opinion of the world. 1t practically denies an
nations. It is the hcartlcss creed of the infdel,
who prctends to think everything governed by n
blind, sensclcss fate. 1t is seldom in the moral
economy of the world that injustice so monstrous
is, for any length o: time, allowed to predomi-
nate. In civilized age such state of things is
morally impossible. Small nations have rights
as wel as large ones and, under kind Provi-
dcncc, can always maintain them while they pur-
sue the paths ofduty and honor.
Willie exclusion, therefore, from the trade Of
the United States would not I'M ure onr commerce,
European nations woull never allow the Federal
Government in time Of peace, 70 impose rcstric-
tions on our trade with the old world. As to
any pressure upon our commerce by any Euro
pcan nation, we have, evidently, nothing to fear.
The products Of our State will always gain for lis
favorable reception at any port in Europe.
It is equally difficult 20 sec how the institution
of slavery will be endangered by any foreign in
fuence, when South Carolina has established her
independence.
From what source is danger to come? Certain
ly not from the States that Immediately surround
us; for they arc as deeply interested in prcserv-
ing the institution rs ourselves. They wculd
rather serve as q thick wall 10 guard and defend
u.s. Would European powers disturb us or
all future events, this is the most improbable.
How could they, if they desired? Their incen-
diary documents could not reach us. In our
commercial intercourse, we should have no deal
ings with the fanatics of Europe and the dis
tancc is too great for them to exercise any infu
ence over our public opinion.
But a state of facts is conjured mp 10 give OPP
portunty to Great Britain to intcrmeddlc with
our slavery A war is supposed 10 break out
between South Carolina and the General Govern
mcnt We are imagined to be fortunate enough
to secure the aid Of Great Britain. With this
alliance South Carolina gains IN honorable peace
Future relations are now to be settled between
this State and Great Britain. Is it in the bound
Of reason to suppose, that after assisting the State
to defend her institutions against the fanaticism
of the North, Great Britain would offer to free
our slaves, or to reduce us TO dependent colo
N.Y. If she did, what would be her prospect Of
succcss2 Would We not defend ourselves as
stouily against her, as we may have done against
the United Statcs2 But such terms would never
be offered There is no reason to suppose so
In much less enlightened times, England gave
repeated assistance TO the smaller European
powers in their wars with larger nations butwe
read of her making no such humating PROPOSE
tions. The idea is positively absurd. What
benefit could Great Britain promise herself by
such scheme, if carried into eftct7 She ccr-
tanly could not desire to free the slaves in South
Carolina, without wishing to free them in the
other States But how could she lend her hand
to this ncfarious object7 Would not the aboli-
ton of slavery at once put a stop to the culture
Of cotton in the United States What then would