Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1869-12-04
BEEOuEB's THARMsA
SEREcg.
EulOgy ON states Isiglg
More Secession Anticipated

/ ~ > 1hallks8 giving Sermon IlQ NC
find the following abstract IL two
Of tbe New York papers
T E FFom fLe Times.
/ The great extent of our coantry
.is liable to involve conflicting, in
terests that break out IN opea an
tagOnism. The fact that our late
rebellion has been crushed ought
not to beguile us IN perfect securi-
ty. Few know how near it come
| TO be a success. 1t is presumptu-
Gus to rest in the belief that the
! Union is secured forever. Even
if we are prevented from rupture
by the passions Of men, yet We
may not always be prevented from
separation if the antagonism of
interest should demand separa-
tion. We should bear id mind
that a nation cannot be perma-
nently kept together, except by
making it for the interest of all 10
keep it together. Rhode Island
or New jersey might rot be able
to break away, but the great Pa
cifc slope or the great Southwest
move on a different scale. Ii was
as if by accident that military
power was successful III the late
conflict. But hereafter moral pow
cr will rule. For his own part,
Mr.. Beecher said he should not
regard a separation Of oui' coun-
try into three or four Republics, if
it should, in the future, be desila-
ble, with that detestation with
which he looked upon the late re-
belliOn in behalf of human slavery,
provided those different Republics
moved together in harmony, each
bent on achieving the higher ends
Of liberty and good government.
The pelpetuity Of our Union must
be maintained, if at all, by tho
common consent Of the people,
founded on common interest, And
if reason and not force is to deter
mine the question SO much the
greater was the responsibility rest
ing upon our statement and the
good and moral men Of all sec
tions.
[From tie World.
The recent failure of the at
tempt at disintegration ought not
to breed undOubted 81 curity. Few
knew how near it came TO proving
a success. 1t was an attempt
funded on that which was odious
to the moral sense of the world.
1t had bad cOtnsellors. But should
the Pacific States, in another gen
GRAFTON, without slavery as a vile
curse, with strong commercial rei-
sons, undertake separation, the is
sue would probably be very differ
ent. Our late success, then, must
not argue success in every subse-
quent case. Tie failure MUST not
lead us to suppose that no other
attempts would be made Should
the Southern States, now tempo
rarily exhausted, renew the strug-
gle for independence, on the
ground Of political economy, the
issue was not to be perceived fl'om
the issue of the recent war. 1t
was pr S mptuous to rest in, the
belief that the question of the Tn
ion was settled forever. The States .
could never be prevented from
if their real interests
lay in separation. Unity could
only be secured by making it to
the interest Of each section to re
main united. Rhode Island mi ght
j OF be able to withdraw alone, nor
New Jersey, nor Connecticut, nor
S nth Carolina even, nor any sin
gle State, but the whole South,
the whole Southwest, the great
Northwest, and the vast Pacific
slope move on different planes
from single States. Itf'yas moral
power, nd tat alone, which could
secure the perpetuity Of the I'm
ion. "That or nothing" And,
while he could look upon the dis
of the Union with the
deepest feelings of sorrow he still
would not regard such an event
with the same abhorrenoe he, did
the late struggle. If four great
republics sprang into existence, i'll
tie stead OF the Union as it is, he
should regard such an occur
leace as the result of reaction.
Absolute political union was bet
ter, so far as we could now see.
However, separation would not be
fatal. Still, union was SO II ucA
better that it was the duty Of every
Christian patriot to do all in his
power to maintain it. 1t should
be well understood that there was
no band, neither was there a strip
Of iron long or strong enough, to
hold together unwilling parts. No
political force could accomplish
that result. If there was perpet-
uated unity Of the States, that
unity would be based on common
consent founded upon common in
terests. The arrogance Of no party,
nor of intellect, wealth, religion,
nor politics, should drive of an
other part. All the machinery
must work tremendously, ON the
blsiS of political and physical in
terests. When this was as broad