Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1861-02-13
THE "1RREpREss1BLE CONFLICT ,

The doc trine of an 'irrepresSible conflict
between the two social systems of the n orth
and of the South, after having been cited for a
time as one of the most signal evidences of
Northern fanaticism,' has come to be most
accepted criterion of "loyalty to the South and
its Institutions" For while this dogma was
held up to the adherence of every Southern
citizen, and any word of explanation adven
tured in the premises by way of reference to
the context OF Mr.. Stewards Rochester speech,
in which that Senator was supposed to have
promulgated that idea, only subjected the can
did Journalist to the imputation of being will
ling apologist for 'sBlack Republican heresy.''
Now, however, we find this same dogma warm
ly eSpoused at the South by those who assume
TO be par excellence the custodians of Southern
rights and the champions of Southern inter-
ests. To this effect the Charleston Mercury,
echoing the language recently held in the
name of South Carolina by her Commissioners,
the Hon. l.. W. Spratt, before the Florida
Convention, says as follows in its number of
the 18th of January =
''The social and political organization of the
South is, in all respects, theoretically and
practically, different and opposed to that of the
North. Southern Institutions are essentially
conservative. 1t recognizes distinct order and
classes. 1t establishes them. One third of the
whole Southern population do not cast sin
gle vote. They are disenfranchised. They are
not recognised as citizens OF the several States
They are slaves. In South Carolina one half
of the population of the State are in this cate
CORY. The distinctive feature of South Caro-
lima is its conservatism in all things-its obe-
dence to its laws; its love of order; it's re-
spect for authority, divine and human. South
ern society is unquestionably of an aristocratc
cast. Every white man is of a favored class.
He is, among others around him, "a Roman
citiZen.' Feeling his own authority, he recog-
rizes that which he has established. AS the
great political philosopher, Burke, defines il,
he yields "a proud submission and dignified
obedience Through habit, association, and
education, it becomes his second nature.
Southern society individualizes men. North
ern society conglomerates, centralizes men.
They are two distinct systems of political
ganization, based on two radically different
theories of government. Hence Mr.. Seward is
quite right when he says there exists between
them san irrepressible conflict They are in
direct conflict, the one with the other. 1t is,
therefore, quite impossible to conceive how,
under one balot-box, the two can co-exist in
one Government. Men may theorize that if
the North would adhere TO the Constitution
there would be no difficulty. They beg the
question. The If is in opposition to the ma
ture of things. Men cannot be moulded, in
their inherent nature, to our wills. There are
certain laws which will always govern them.
Under the existing Union the theory and in
stitutions of Southern society, or that of Nor
thern society, will eventually give way. For
both to exist, continue and work out their own
ends, they must be separated. II there exist
ed no other reason, policy and theory alike
would demand that the Southern people should
be a separate: independent people.''
Here, then, we have the s'irrepressible con-
fict" doctrine set forth by the Charleston Mer-
Gerry in stronger terms than were used by its
reputed author, and looking to a contingency.
which he never contemplated. 1t remains 10
be seen whether Democratic editors will be as
ready to denounce that dogma now, when ad-
vocated by the South, as they were to vil'ify
Mr.. Seward for making his Rochester speech.