Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1858-08-21
IRON the Charleston Is. C. Neremy.1
FIGHTING ABOLITION lNsTHE UNION.

We suppose all men in the South are for fight
ing abolition in the Union" whilst the Union lasts.
But we propose to give what we conceive to be the
objections of large portion of the people OF the
ton in the Union as o preferable policy. They OBJ
ject to this battle, for two reasons: l. Because it
ought not to exist and, O. Because they satisf.
ed that they must be beaten. '-
And, first, this battle ought not to exist. Did our
ancestors put into the Union, that We might fight
within it for the institution of slavery? Suppose
when the Constitution was being made, it had ap-
peared manifest to the trainers of it that by the gov
eminent it established, the Southern States would
have TO encounter ncessant warfare, made by the
Northern States the institution of slavery, would
a single Southern State have adopted the Constitu
ton or have entered the Union it established? Most
certainly they would not. So far from any such an
ticipaton existing South Calolina and Georgia, in
the Convention which framed the Constitution, dis
tnctly declared that they would not enter the Union
unless the slave trade was opened until 1SOS.-
These States could not have meant that they should
obtain slaves from Africa to be assaed in the Union
for owning them. They supposed that their property
in their slaves would be quietly and peaceably
enjoyed in the Union as out Oft They neither in
tended to give, nor did they give, by the Consttu-
ton, any jurisdiction whatever to the Government
of the Union the institution of slavery, save to
protect it. So clearly was the understanding OF the
nature of the union the Constitution established,
that amongst all the objections to the Constitution
in all the State Conventions which ratified it, not
man suggested that it might become an instruement
for assaiing the institution of slavery to overthrow
it. Yet Senator Seward, in the Senate last winter
openly declared their design of abolishing slavery in
the South by the agency of the General Govern
ment. A large portion of the people of the South
object to this Black Republican warfare. They OBJ
ject to being forced into any defensive contest on
the institution of slavery 1t is an unconstitutional
outrage. They are put by it into false and ignomi
NOUS position Instead Of equals they assailed
as interiors. Instead Of the Union protecting their
property. it is the instrument by which it is ques
toned and endangered. Instead of friends it gives
US enemies-instead of peace, war. Now, for the
single reason that by the Government of the Union
the South has to fight abolition in the Union, as
fixed fact, large portion of the people Of the
South are for dissovlng it. union with aboli-
tionists, with an eternal war on the institution of
slavery, is not the union our fathers made. 1t is
uncomfortable, disgraceful, runous
But supposing it to be very proper and the very
perfection of. wisdom never to dissolve the Union,
but to fight with all might in the Union, for the
institution of slavery, what is the prospect-can
vanquish its opponents? To answer this question
satisfactorily We must look to two considerations l,
What has been our success in our past efforts in
this war? and 2, What are our present resources?
Experience has always been supposed to be
more truthful guide in human affairs than any mere
anticipatons So perverted is human nature, and
SO complex are the influences that control human
AFFAIRS that what has been is the best proof OF what
will be.
The South has been fighting this battle of aboli-
ton in the Union for some twenty five years. Be-
fore it was begun by John Quincy Adams, Congress
was free of all agitatons the subject of slavery
STAKEHOLDER could carry his slaves to Washington
and keep them in peace. He could carry them with
him throughout tine Northern States and not be mo-
Tested insulted slave State and free State were
admitted simultaneously to keep up the relative
power of the two sections of the Uoion in the Sem
ate. The idea that the Southern States should be
excluded from territory of the United States, &C
qured by treaty conquest, was not heard of. Are
not ali these things changed? Southern slavery is
the grand subject for Congressional! agitation and
the formation of parties in the Union. How very
few Southern masters dare carry their slaves to
Washington or to the North! The recovery Of fugi-
tive slaves is farce a tragedy. Vast territories
have been acquired and the South has submitted to
be excluded from them all. The Sonth is cast into
minority in both branches of Congress, which
time can only increase. The two sections of the
Union stood arrayed against each other in the late
p esdenta election the institution Of slavery,
and the North failed of success only by plurality
vote, on account of party divisions The first meet
ing of Congress under the new Administration has
been signazed by renewed agitations the subject
of slavery, and the defeat of the South Now, here
is experience. On which side does it promise ulti
mate success? Does it not show the steady pro
gress and ultimate triumph of abolition in the
Union?
But let US turn to our second consderation-ou
present resources-'' to fight abolition in the Union"
What are they? Reason! Well, reason has
tany been influential in Strengthening the Southern
mind to the righteousness and necessity of the
institution of slavery but has it made any progress
in reconcing the Northern mind to this institution?
That it has not is proved by the steady progress of
80 ,ln roo1: ~. -k:l
it has become the pivot on which parties turn. In
terest! Does it always prevent the most runous
revolutions? Did interest rule Spain when she ex-
terminated or drove out of her territory six millions
OF Moors, constituting at that time the most civilized
portion of her people? Did interest rule France
when she massacred or drove out the Huguenots
from her borders? Did interest govern England
when she forced on the revolution of 1776, and
made us an independent people? Here is contest
between two sections of country, under the same
government, differing radically in their institutions
which constitute the criterion of partes-slavery or
antslavery-North or South-which shall rule ?
Fanaticsm and the lust for power is on one sde-the
acting, the aggressing side. On the other con-
seriousness of right, and Constitution broken and
tramped on, acting on the defensiue. Now add that
the acting and Gggressing party has been steadily
for the last twenty-five years gaining, whilst the
South has been losing, power; that it has now the
mastery of both branches of Congress; and that
every yeai ny hSIease VI popuialion anu the aOOl-
ton of new States it must increase in power and can
the result be doubted2 The position of the South in
the Union is that of increasing sceakness- that Of
the North of increasing strength. The South has
been beaten, and the North has been victorious, in
every battle of abolition fought in the Union; yet
are told to go and fight this desperate battle
in the Union, and fight it nowhere else. We must
not look at disunion measure to support us-not
even refuge from the fierce and remorseless ia
naticism which would extinguish the South in flames
and blood. We to cling to the Union as the
terrified wretch chung to the anchor of the ship 60
ing down helpless wreck beneath the waves Such
course is not approved of by large portion of the
people of the South. They do not think that "i
is great deal better than talking of dissolving the