Delaware Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1843-1874, 1873-05-26
Anglo Saxon COnfederacy.
FRANCIS vINCENT'S REPLY TO JOHN
O'BYRNE

i Anglo Saxon COnfederacy.
| FRANCIS yINCENTS REPLY TO JOIN
O,BYRNE.
see in the Advertiser of the goth Of Marcl
well written article, under the head Of "Fral
els Vincent's Anglo Saron Confederacy," cor
cisely and brilliantly reviewing the measur
which am endeavoring to bring about, viz :
"A union of the Anglo Saxon or Englis
speaking races under one government, which
believe, In common with many Of our mo.
thoughtful and earnest men, living under bot
the English speaking governments, would iI
crease our wealth, intelligence and eomfor
diminshe our hours of labor, and finally abo
ish war entl,ely.
This article came from the pen of that bril-
liant scholar, and cute thinker, John O'Byrns
But think cali prove tha. his premises i
this particular are erroneous, and shall there
fore point out what believe are the errors II
Ills article, seriatim.
He first says:
Theorists and good natured dreamers ma
| amuse themselves with such scheme; ;hard heal
ed men Of the world may declare, sif It could b
brought about, it would stop all wars Th
fearful 'if' Is there.'
Will leave out the opinions of the 'theorist
and dredmers,' and take those OF shard headet
men, viz:
Jit could be brought about It ,oo,ld stop al
aodrs. Now what Is to prevent the accomplish
ment Of this ff.- We are both (thc tw,
English speaking governments) free people,
| ihat Is we elect men who make the laws, herr
directly, In the British government rather indi
rectly. But in both divisions the people rule
and when they have made up their mind there
| shall be an alteration In their form Of govern
ment; they have simply to carry out their wills
and the thing Is accomplished.
Suppose We decide to elect no men TO Con-
gress or the State Legislature but those who fa.
vor this measure, and tho English and theiI
colonies at the same time make similar decis.
| ion that none shall be elected to their leglsla.
tive assemblies unless they favor unity under
| one government of the English speaking peope;
/ what then will stop it +? With us nothing could.
In Britain 1t would simply bo the monarchy
and the peers. But The English, like ourselves
| allow no impediment to their expressed will
The monarchy and the peers have always
yielded, and always will yield to the popular
voice. II they did not they would be swept
| away. No man or body OF men in Anglo Sax
ondom can place themselves In the way as a
barrier to stop the progress OF the popular good
without being overwhelmed. Both divisions
Oh the Anglo Saxon race may oppose this. Or
only one may oppose it. In that case this unity
can never be brought about, as 1t would take
the hearty good will, and brotherly feeling Of
both to accomplish it. But as the hard headed
men and every one else who examines the sub.
ject will say " it could DO brought about 1t ,oomd
stop all tcdrs. And as wars are expensive and
productive Of suffering and cruelty, and as all
this expense has to be paid for by increased tell
Cor there Is no wealth, but labor,) and this
suffering has to be endured by us all. Now
when a simple measure comes fairly before the
people, and they know that "iC' 1t Is adopted 1t
will in the one case save us from expense, and
In tho other from enduring this agony, what
reason have we to suppose that they will not
make this supposition [this thing that may bel
factp and reunite the two that We're one once,
and that should be SO now. The Anglo Saxon
loves unity as well as any other race, II took
seven years OF bloody war, and much heart-rend-
ing to separate us at first. 1t took over four
years OF bloody warto prevent another separa-
tion of our race on this continent, and thus hay-
ing three divisions instead ftwc. Now nearly ey-
cry one thinks that our unity OH this hemisphere
was cheaply preserved at the expense of ten
thousand millions Of dollars and i million of
lives. If we were willing to force one part of
our race 10 keep their unity ioith us at such a
huge expense Of blood and money? Why
should we not agree TO our unity with another
portion that would cost us nothing, save the
expense of the Convention that formed the
Constitution which bound us together The
reasons are just as strong, and the advantage as
great for the unity of the whole race as for as
part.
Both Americans and Britains are apt to sus-
tain such measures, upon consideration as will
benefit them.
They have no desire to injure themselves
and other people, and to break the idtV of God,
by shedding their brothers blood when there is
no necessity for it. Therefore when the "if''
is all that stand in the way, as the only con-
tingency, 1t will be removed altogether.
Again the learned writer says:
"The scheme of Mr.. Vincent is impractcable
vicious and unnatural. Look at it !! Is 1t not
plan for enacting stagnation In the gustfu at
mospcre ofthe world of national politics? God
did not make the universe for this, or fashion
us to inhablt such world. Uniform level OF
nations! The curse at the garden gate is heavy
enough, but 1t is light and easy when compared
with this. Does Mr.. Vincent know what the
stagnation aud immobility of such confederacy
means?"
Again must differ with him. see nothing
impracticable in doing that which simply re-
quires the exercise Of our own will, and which
nothing when We arc so determined can pre-
utnt.
Foreign powers may sometimes say to weak
and discovered nations, you shall not re-unite
yourselves, and be one,' 'Our interest requires
you to be apart, ,and thus have scperate interests
| and quarrel and fight between yourselves.
SO spoke the Roman to the Achian League
which was becoming power by Its love of jus.
| tice. 1t desired union Of the Grccian States
which the Roman opposed.
But what powers or combination of powers
will dare say so to the mighty Anglo Saxoni
that have under their dominion about ont
fourth 9fhe territory Of the wortd, and about
what respect such unien is either vicious Of
| unnatural? 1t is certainly not vicious or unnat
urdl, but virtuous and according to nature tc
desire close union with the brothers of oui
blood.
To settle our differences by trials In Courts
established for that purpose according TO the
| right ofthe NATTER and the law, made by our.
| selves by common agreement instead OF whole
sale murder, .vulgarly called war. differ also
| in regard to its being plan 'enacting stagna.
| tion in the gusffd atmosphere Of national poll.
| tics.' There Is difference between peace and
| stdgnation. Peace does not prevent the world
| from moving. 1t simply means progress. Wal
| may be be gustful but il Is unhealthy. The
| excitement is like a terrible fever to the hu.
man body. 1t sometimes destroys 1.-THE patient
but is never wholesome. States by 1t have
been injured and destroyed. Never really BEN
fitted, save when entered into from a good
cause.
| differ from the statement that God did
not make the universe for this, or fashion us tc
inhablt such world.' Holy writ says: Thou
shalt not kill and that She that uses the swort
shall perish by the sword
Also:-'That there should be glory to God IL
the highest and peace and good will anongs
men, Therefore as understand the Almighty.
desire, 1t is that men ESPECIALLY the same race,
should dwell upon the earth together in harmo
ny. And that man should do all the good he
could, and as little injury as possible to his fel
low man. Therefore, speaking for myself,
would much rather live in the world, wheI
wars and murders We're unknown, than wheI
| mankind rlaara1 thp atmnsDhAra Inv lastrnyint
his fellow.
l cannot comprehend how living together II
brotherly friendship could be heavier than "th
| oursa of tla oardan gafa