New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-07-06
"rYDER WHICH KING p

Hon. Alex. II. Stephens is writing, and
has partly published, History of our late
unpleasantness, which he entities "The War
"between the States" Mr.. Stephens has just
felt impelled to write a letter explaining away
the major propositions of his book. 1t strikes
us that Mr.. S. might have wisely RETAINED
from writing his book, and thus spared him
self the annoyance of writing his letter. But
our readers shall judge for themselves.
Mr.. Stephens's theory Is that the Union was
a mere league of sovereign powers, and Of
course dissoluble at the pleasure of those
powers respectively-Of minority, or, in fact
of any one of them, so far as that one is con-
cerned. And he quotes sundry conspicuous Re
publicans-among them, Abraham Lincoln,
BENJAMIN F. Wade, and Horace Greeley-as
having, at some time, favored this view.
Mr.. Stephens is utterly mistaken. Leaving
others to speak for themselves, we can assure
him that Horace Greeley never, at any mo-
ment of his life, imagined that a single State,
or a dozen States, could Tightfully dissolve the
Union. The doctrine of Horace Greeley, which
Mr.. Stephens has COMPOUNDED with State Sove-
reignty, is that Of Popular Sovereignty, or the
right of a People to recast or modify their po-
litical institutions and relationship right set
forth by Thomas jefferson in the Declaration
of American Independence, as follows:
1--WE hold these truths TO be sefevdent: that all
created equal that they are endowed by their Crea
life liberty, and the pursuit OF happiness; that TO Sc
cure these rights, governments are instituted among
men, deriving their just powers from the consent OF the
governed that whenever any form OF government be-
destructive OF these ends. IL Is the night OF me
PeODe alter abolish IT, and 10 institute new gov
ernment laying its foundation on such principles and
organizing It's in such form as TO them shall seem
fba1v 10 Of sal baDpiuggsp
This doctrine of JefTerson's we have ever
received; and we have held it precisely as it
reads. The same is true, we presume, of
Messrs. Lincoln, Wade, and other Republicans.
Mr.. Stephens may say it justifes the sO-called
Secession of the South; we think differently.
We hold that Secession the work of violent,
subversive, bullying, terrOrzing minority, over
awning and sitting the voice of a decided ma
jority of the Southern People. The facts which
justify this conclusion are embodied in The
american Conflict, more especially in Vol. l.,
chap. xxi. According to Mr.. Stephens's con-
ception a majority of the people Of Delaware,
consisting of less than 100000 persons, might
lawfully dissolve the Union, but the whole
population of New-York, south of the High
lands-at least 100000 in number-cOuld do
nothing of the kind. Mr.. Stephenss may pos
siby be the true doctrine, but it certainly
never was ours, nor of any Republican so far
as we know. The right we affirm is not based
on the Federal Constitution, but is before and
above any and all Constitutions.
Mr.. Stephens in his letter or cOdicil says:
when stated that secession had been abandoned by
the people OF the Southern States meant all that said,
and uttered nothing but the truth Its abandonment
accepted IN good faith Of the results of the
IL rs no longer looked 10 In any contingency practical
remedy check against any usurpations abuses OF
power on the part Of the Federal Governments This
abandonment their part has been manifested In every
form in which public as we'll private honor be
pledged All the States IN their conventions have with
ont equivOcatiOB, given IL emphatic abandonment.
Even the Southern Generals in the NewYork Convention
last year, 70 whom such unkind aluson is made by
Judge Nicholas gave their pledged honor TO this aba
dOnment by unanimously sustaining the platform OF
principles then announced. Whether they unpar.
dOned' or not their individual honor and In.
tegrity certainly untarnshed and unsulled
far beyond the reach Of all impeachment reproach
This fling OF Judge Nicholas at the Southern Generals
was 10 90 less unknd than unjust Why
he should have applied to them the epithet OF
dOned know not, for II am correct In my recOlec.
tOn the imputation Is utterly without foundation in
fact
No uterance OF mine therefore, presents to the peo
pie OF the North South tho question Of secession
hvng ssne This 10 but the work OF imagination the
part Of Judge Nicholas. opposed 1t as an eTpedient
remedy at tho time it resOrted TO- though believed
IL 10 De ri0hfI one And, though believe 1t TO be
rght One did not believe II % be the only One much
less the ssSl the bSi one. then thought and still