New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-01-31
A WAR OF BOUNDARIES.


A Secession War, as We haze often said, Is
not to be war of coercion, but war of bOun-
dares. If the shareholders of the Gulf States
would be reasonable, they might perhaps eventu-
ally get away peaceaby. Florida is of small ac-
count to the United States, if we take out Po1-
secola, the Tortugos and Key West. The slave
holding territory east Of the Mississippi and south
q the Potomac can be spared by the nation
without great detriment. But the approaches to
the Gulf, the country north Of the Potomac, and
that West OF the Mississippi River, and the con
troll Of the mouths of thot river, cannot he spared
While cur writers are considering the question
Of "pcsceable secession" therefore, let them ln-
derstaud lust what they are writing about. II,
in process of time. we come to this subject az
practical question, LEI us not overlook The real
poiIt. of the case. 1t may turn out that hoOouy
viii have, in the end, any objection to getting
rid of South Carolina. But does any man sup
nose that MARYLAND and Delaware and Missouri
and some other States within the limits indicated
can be allowed TO cut themselves adrift from the
existing Unionl Grant that they are SLAVE
Statea. They are not go IN the sense In
which many other States are Slaveh0ldnR
States Delaware. Maryland, and Missouri have
comparatively very few slaves. Nobody can doubt
the prsctcubiiy of emancipation in those Sta'e'
at 40 distant day, without any shock Whatever
70 their social or political system, or to their lo-
dustrlal interests 1t would thus be the easitSt
thing in the world for them to conform t. the
institutions Of the Free States in every way IT
they chose to do so. There is 40 hnderaHe
whatever but that of inclination. And II there
are Shareholders in those States who would pn'-
fer holding their slaves to sharing IN some gen
eral plon Of emancipation which the majority ot
those shareholders might devise, under system
of compensation granted by the Federal Govern
mept, why. then, not only their extremist right,
but their preudices even, need not be disturbed.
They would remain Shareholders, and be pro-
tecIcd ms such.
But the fact that. in the event Of separation
of the Free and Slave States, some OF the latter
would have TO remain on the Free state side 81
the line, admits Of no question. Those there
fore, who find it profitable to engage IN specr-
lations Of this sort, may rs well turn Their
attention TO the question of whether, even
admitting the policy Of peaccablc secession to b.
a sound one 10 some future possible contingency,
these boundary questions would not be quite as
difficult to settle as any other.
ALREADY, Georgia las decided that she does
not desire Delaware in the Southern Con
federacy, ard the commonest prudence would
dictate to the Slave States that Mason and
Dixon's line would be tue worst hind Of from
tier for sayehOldiDg country. Ii might suit
Virginia very we'll to interPose Mar! land between
her and the Free States ms convenient breast
work; but when Il is considered that frontier
line should be- defensiblc, il will not probably be
deemed a ting one by the Slave States gener-
ally. But the question is just as good one 70
20 to war on, and just as likely TO produce
war, as any other that eau be- imagined. For
the Free States would be quite as particular
about their frontier line as tie Slave States.
Tho nuastio. 81 ease :ie-,;e~i lee - a'i GirthSr
most grayely complicated by the position Of the
Federal capital, which most certainly would not
be surrendered by the Free States.
So that without crossing tie Mississippi River,
or going to its mouth, to see what would be
done there in the event Of separation, there
would he no difficulty in raising questions OF
boundary that would seem to be ample to occupy
the attention Of the ingenious spectators upon
'peaceable secession who think c)nn'c. can
OILY arise from willml determinations 10
"coerce sovereign States" unnecessarily.