The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1861-11-08

- o.A~ ASVW0los
From the London Times, oot.s
The secession had been contemplated and
threatened for some thirty years past. II
was defended by arguments as good as have
been usually advanced for national insur.
rections, and if it was in opposition to the
dictates of political wisdom, it was in con.
formity with the passions of human nature.
The States of the old American Union
would perhaps have been more prosperous
at home, and certainly more formidable
abroad, if they had remained united; but
the same may be said of the States of all the
empires which have ever fallen to pieces.
Union is strength always and everywhere,
and the larger the population that can be
retained under these conditions the greater
will be the result. But it happens that
these considerations are not allowed to pre-.
vail against influences of more immediate
kind. The vision of independence is more
attractive than the vision of power. The
people of the Southern States are only doing
what the people,Of hundred other States
have done before them. They may be short
sighted, but they are determined. They
may be mistaken, but they know their own
minds. They may be wrong, but they are
ten millions. The federalists themselves
admit right of insurrection, but deny that
lnsurrection can be justified in the present
instance. That argument, however, can
never stand. 1t is absurd to say that re-.
bellion is a sacred popular privilege, but
that it can only be exercised with the assent
of those against whom it would be directed.
The Emperor of Russia might admit the
doctrine as thus stated. If people have a
right to rebel against governments, it must
be when they think fitting, and not when
the governments allow it.
So long as the instruction of the South
seemed spiteful rebellion against the re-
suits of particular election we were CONS
PEELED to regard it as unjustiiable. If it
meant only, as has been asserted, "bullet
against ballot" we should look upon it as
a wicked and reasonable act for never
could the North be charged, notwithstand-
ing its commercial bias, with a want of con-
sideratiOn for the institutions of the South.
If, again, the question could be argued on
pure. grounds OF expediency, we should here
also, though not so decidedly, pronounce
against the resolution taken by the South
to divorce itself from the North. But tie
actual case is very different. The last
twelve months have shown concIusively that
Northerners and Southerners are irreconci-
liable as Greeks and Turks, or Germans and
Magyars. This war will but intensity and
perpetuate animoslties which the very ma
ture of things had long ago created. "Sec-
tiOnal" antipathies have proved as stubborn
as national antipatbies. They could not be
assuaged by compromise, and they assured
ly will not be abolished by conquest. The
armies of the North may overpower the
armies of the South, but South and North
may never be expected to amalgamate
again. It is for this reason, and because
territories so prodigious as those of the
Southern States can never be retained by
armed occupation, that we think the policy
of the federal government wrong. If the
whole case of the war is to be analysed, we
must needs say the Northerners have the
right on their side, for the Southerners have
des' royed, without provocation, mighty
political fabric, and have impaired the glory
and strength of the great American Re-
public. But, as they have chosen to do this,
as they have shown themselves hitherto no
less powerful than their antagonists, as the
decision of so large population cannot be
condemned, and as we cannot persuade our.
selves that genuine peace is likely to
spring from protracted war, we should re-
joice to see the paciication of America pro.
NOTED by other means.