Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1868-02-29
The AntagoNistic Principles.

It is a postu!ate, with many writer's OF this
day, that the late war was the result OF two
opposing ideas, or principles, upon the subject
of African Slavery. Between these, according
to their theory, sprung tie "irre7resslble con-
f1ict, " in principle, which ended in the terrible
c )nhict Of arms Those who assume this
postulate, and SO theorizc upon it, are but SUI
perfcial observers.
That the War had its origin in opposing
principles, which, ia their action upon the con.
duct of men, produced the ultimate collision OF
arms, may be assumed as an unqucstlonaDle
fact. But the opposing principles which pro-
duced these results in physical action were OF Il
very different character from those assumed IN
the postulate They lay in the organic st !G,
ture of the Government OF the States The
conflict in principle arose from different and o2'
posing ideas IS to the nature Of Whist Is knoWn
as the General Government The contest was
between those who held it to be strictly Federal
in its character, and those who maintained that
it was thoroughly National. 1t was the strife
between the principles OF Federation, on the
one side, and Ccntralis,n, or CONSOLIDATION, Oh
the other
Slavery, so-calIed was but the question on
which these antagonistic principles, which had
been in conflict, from the beginning, on divers
other questions, were finally brought luto &C
tual and active collision with each other on the
| field OF battle.
| Some of the strongest anti slavery rIcn who
ever lived were on the side Of those who OBJ
| posed the CentraIizng principles which led &c
| the War Mr. Jefferson was striking Illus
tration Of this, and prominent example OF 4
very large class OF both sections Of the country,
who were, most unfortunately. brought liz hos
tile array against each other No more earnest
or ardent dcvotee to the emancipation OF the
| Black race, upon humane, rational and Constr
utional principles, ever lived than he Vas
Not even Wilberorcc himself was more dcV0:
ted to the cause than Mr. Jefferson was. Ard
yet Mr.. Jefferson, though in private Ilfe at this
time, is wcll-known to have been utterly oppo-
sed to the Ccntralizng principles, when iIrst
| presented on this question: and restrictions ca
| the State Of Missouri vixen she applied Tor adj
mission into the Union, under the Constitution;
He looked upon the movement as roAuca
mannuvre to bring this delicate sutjcct and
one that lay so near his heart into the Federal
ConociIs. with yicw BY its agitation in 4
| forum where it did not properly belong, &c
strengthen the Ccntrai,ts in their efforts to re-
vive their doctrines, which had been 50 sIgna!-
| ly defeated on so many other questions. Inc
first sound Of their movements on this question
fell upon his ear as a fire bell st night. The
same is true Of macy Others. Several OF the
ablest opponents OF that State Restriction: III
Congress, were equally wel!-,no"n TO be as de-
cidedly in favor OF emancipation as Nlr. JetIer-
son was. Amongst these, may be named Mr..
Pinckney and Mr. Clay, from the South, to
say nothing Of those men from the North, who
| opposed that measure with equal frmncS' and
! integritv. -ALeraadcr Il .NcphcMs.