Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1861-06-04
From the Central Presbyterian.
An Appeal for Righteousness and Peace.
q. T. SEM, HAMPDEN SIDNEY, VA.
Nav llth 1861

REQ. Wne. ~. EngIes, u. H., Sr. Editor Of the
6 Presby byterias"-R AND DEAR BROTHER =
+. For twenty years have taken your paper. In
all this time. do not remember that / ever
read an editorial with any other feelings than
those Of appreciation, and often of admiration
In the number for April 9th, (the last received,
but recently am panied to find many sentences,
in two prominent editorials, which contain grave
errors, and serious imputations on your South
ern brethren. In writing on the estate of the
Country you intimate that the issue between
the North and South is in the question; ssshall
there be q government of laws, or shall our
government be torn lassunder by anarchy.'' AT
ter blaming the South for beginning the war
you say the ssgoyernment must and will be sus-
tanned - and in the article on ssThe Excitement
you ascribe the aroused warlike spirit of the
North sst0 intelligence of an endangered Capt.
tai, and expressly ayow belief that this state
of things has been owing to the ssunjustihable
course of the extreme Seuth.'' You had here
tofOre kept prudent silence, but you now array
yourself on the side of the ultra Black Republi-
can papers, secular and religious, and without
one word of ofexplanation of the alleged causes of
the war, or purposes of the South as given by
its own organs, you lead your readers to believe
that we are altogether wrong, and the North al
together right. rejoice that even secular pa
pers in New England and in New York are found
which do US more justice.
The time for discussion Of these topics, has,
alas passed. Yet, with an honest desire to pro-
mote right views, and such as tend to allay
rather than excite strife, beg leave respectful
" and fraternally, to enter solemn protest. and
an explanation of its grounds. Relying on your
known candid, fair and manly course, l venture
to request that you will place it on record in
your paper. may rely on your sense of JUS
tice to your Southen patrons, for years your
friends in trying times, your wonted courtesy to
these differing from you, your regard for per-
sonal friend and Christian (though you may think
erring) brother, and your desire to promote the
ssthings which make for peace" that you will
grant my request. I speak for my Christian
brethren of this region, of whose sentiments |
have had good opportunities to be informed
and for the old Wing and Union parties, with
which, a. far as proper for minister, l have
been connected.
/. Your statement does not present the real
issue. The South has not aimed to produce, nor
has it produced anarchy. The Confederate
States government has been established firmly,
and quietly: with more prOmptness and una
nimity than was that of the United States. By
Conventions tor the most part, elected with dis
cretionary powers, or by popular vote in over
whelming majorities, each State has reserved its
entire sovereignty, and then all united under a
Constitution, in most of its material points, q
copy of that Of the United States. There has
never been in the seven States which thus united
to the action taken; and the few who opposed
the incipient proceedings have finally united with
the majority. In North Carolina, Tennessee,
Virginia and Arkansas, the progress to unanimi-
ty was slower, but dissentients, except few
in some cities perhaps, and on the extreme
Northern border of Virginia, are exceedingly few
and far between.
(1.) The true issue is this shall the governed
when competent, be allowed to select their own
form of government: We contend with the De-
claration of Independence for the Affirmative
It is the principle of our Revolutionary ances-
tors, of the founders of the Dutch Republic, of
the Puritans Of England, the Huguenots of
France, the Presbyterians of Scotland, and the
friends of Constitutional liberty, the world over
It is that for which the Italians now centend,
whose course you 80 nobly endorse in the same
paper in which you blame us. Let US look at
the facts which sustain this view.
Secession Of State is not rebellion. The
ped, but the act we hold lawful, as an act cor
relative to that by which each State entered the
Union-both being alike acts which pre-suppose
State sovereignty.
When the Union was formed it's constitution
was not referred to the people in the aggregate,
but to the people Of each State, as State; and
each was free to adopt or reject. It could not
be binding till adopted, not by majority of the
people, but by nine of the States, which might
contain minority of the whole people,. Sever
al adopted it at once. By others the act Of a.
dOption was only reached after a long struggle,
and Rhode Island did not adopt it for over two
years. Could any one of these States, if recus-
ant have been coerced by the rest to adopt it, on
the ground of any essential relations of the States
or the people? What was done then by the act
Of adoption2 Each State was appealed to, treat
ed, and acted as sovereign State. Each was
asked, and in adopting, agreed to part with cer-
tain attributes of Sovereignty to the Union, and
the people of each State voting for adoption,
elected to have two rulers, one the State to
which they naturally belonged or resided in,
and the other this new government formed by
the Union of ali the States. Thus the United
States is the creature Of the States, not the
States the creatures of the U. States. The States
are not to the United States as county to a
State, blunder for which even a London Editor
rebukes Mr.. Lincoln. There can be no country
till there is State, but States may exist as they
did, without q Union. Collateral to this right
of entering the Union, is the right, for good
cause, to leave it. J. Q. Adams contended for
such right. Though not provided in the Con-
stitution, it is right of self-preservation. AS
we'll say, l may not break contract which may
find is, by another's faults, perverted to my in
jury. Virginia, in adopting the Constitution Of
the United States, expressly reserved this right,
for "more perfect" Union, might become to
any State, especially the weaker, source of ty-
ranny and oppression.
(2.) But has there been good cause for re-
sumption Of the attributes Of State Sovereignty
by the Southern States2 We affirm there has
been. True You deny this. So England denied
that the Colonies had good cause for sssecession.
So the Prelatist denied the righteousness of the
complaint of Puritans and Presbyterians. So
Baptists denied that of the Reformers. But we
claim to be judges of the cause. I will not no.
tice the position of South Carolina or any par
ticular State. We found a party, elected to
power, whose leaders avOwed that there should
be no more slave States, that the South should
not have the right of entering any part OF the
territories, (Our common heritage) unless without
its slaves; and that the whole moral weight of
the Federal Government should be directed to
dent and Vice President were elected. A gov
ernment was organized on principles and policy
which excluded the entire South from partici-
patton. It has been often tauntingly said, that
the South has been offended because its domina-
ton has been ended. This is not so. No South
ern sectional man was ever made President-no
Southern sectional government was ever or
ganized, even when the South was in the ascend
ant. Elections and governments have hereto
fore been controlled on principles which did not
exclude men on sectional grounds. The people
of the North, and that as States, as well as by
combinations" of individuals, had, for years,
resisted the rendition of fugitive slaves, and, as
far as possible, nulIifed the Federal laws, and
rebelled against its Government. Now it was
not necessary to await covert acts'' of govern
ment against US, according to the declared poll
cy of its leaders. Our rights under the con-
stitutiQn were denied. You sicerely profess
your desire that all such should be granted. Sc
hoxyo <hor n