Bristol news. [volume] (Bristol, Va. & Tenn.) 1867-189?, 1874-09-15
RETURNING REASON.
The New York Herald ON the
Southern Question

We lave seen in print since peace
was made. 1t alludes to the rest
less and unhappy condition tf the
Southern people and says:
Some of our empirical statesmen tell
us that the cause of this is slavery
We are weary of this refrain about
slavery. Fifteen years ago, and our
most respected citizens were only too
glad to applaud the violence which
greeted the orators and writer's who
oppose slavery. Now there is no rhe-
tOric i'm the language strong enough to
express our horror of it. Well, slavery
was an evil, just a5 the next genera
ton in England will perhaps regard
the crown. the aristOcracy aud the Es-
tablished Church as evils. But it was
an institution, and so puissant as all
element of political influence that 1t
enabled comparatively small portion
of the people to rule the Union. For
nearly two centuries under our colon
ial and federal forms of government,
we treated slavery as an institution
For ten years we have treated it as
carire. The question arises and ii is
Il question Of supreme magnitude, as
our readers will see when they dwell
upon 1t, whether it is the soundest
craftsmanship to deal with any insti-
tuition as a crime. There is the dan
ger of reaction AID inviting strife
This danger Cromwell incurred when
he pronounced monarchy a crime by
sending Charles |. to the scaffold. A
far created danger the French people
invited when they denounced royalty,
religion and rank as so many grades OF
crime. The samo, in a lesser degree,
fell upon the republicans in Paris and
Madrid when they denounced proper
ty capital and law as crimes. The log
ic which animated Cromwell in his
dealings with Charles Stuart, the logic
which breathed through the French
Revolution, the Commune uprising
and the Republic of Pi V Margal, was
perfect. 1t was unansweraEIe, soul
stirring, sublime. 1t was not the
craftsmanship of common sense. 1t
recalled the eloquent periods with
which our own writers and statesmen
welcomed emancipation. Nothing is
easier than TO prove that royalty, arts
tOcracy, standing armies, laws con-
corning lard, entail, primogeniture
and the Established Church are all
| crimes-as criminal as the selling of
human souls into bondage. But Gus
! tom and law made them institutions
When we deal with institutions as
with crimes, we provoke the excuses
which compelled the restoration of
Charles. the coup d'etdt of Napoleon,
the suppression of the Commune, the
successful conspiracy of SerranO. and
the growth Of Reputation and anarchy
| in the South, There is no
reconstruction. On the contrary we
sec disturbance, civil outbreaks, cor
| TuptiOn and disorder, and, worse than
| all, a war upon the national credit by
means Of reputation that will be as
| disastrous to the Union as if the re-
| belliOn had been a success. 1t would
certainly better in the interests of civ
| iliZatiOn and liberty to have two con-
| federacieS, governed by statesmen of
| honor and character, who respected
| credit and scored obligations, than
such q Union as we shall certainly see
| if Arkansas and South Carolina are
| permitted to drag these federal States
| into the abyss of bankruptcy. This
| can be in no respects wholesome Inv
| ing Union. and the end will be de-
structiOn by Reputation more disas-
trous than would have beer the de-
structiOn by war.
What then is the remedy? It is idle
to talk of military power to keep the
peace. No military power can keep
the peace in country bent upon dis
turbance, unless by the determination
of the people. Spain has been trying
for forty years 10 preserve order in her
Byscayan provinces, and in the end
she has civil war as irritating as it
was when EsparterO made himself the
Duke Of Victory. The public senti-
ment of this country would not admit
of any policy which looked to the
| armed occupation of the South. 1t
| would be an expense, an offence, a
| scandal, burden that could never be
cheerfully borne, violation of the ge-
| Mus of our institutions. On the other
hand this public sentim ent would new
er consent 20 the eyival of slavery, to
the recognition of its existence in any
form, except as a crime happily abOl-
! ished and atoned. Nor would il except
| any of the possibilities of those
who made the rebellion, the confeder-
| debt, the cotton loans the losses of those
who went into secession and whose
property was taken by troops, the Sc
| questration of lands like those of Ar
| lingtOn. Nor can we consider for a
moment any policy that would regard
| the negroes of the South, who former
| ly slaves, as in any other relation than
| that of freemen, citizeIs, and entitled
| to every right of citizenship. There
are certain inevitable facts grow ing
out of our war, just as they grow out
of all wars and all revolutions. The
| English Revolution made Parliament
| free and destroyed absolute power
| The French revolution made France
| the home, the heritage and the glory
of every Frenchman. and decreed no.
bic and peasant equal before the law.
| our own secession revolution cOusoli-
| dated the Union and emaucipated the
| slaves. These are the fruits of the con-
test, the inevitable facts that came
from 1t, that can never be destroyed
or taken away, and for which we
should go to war to mOrrcw as eagerly
| as England for the freedom of her Par
lament. Or France for the preservation
| of the fruits of her resolution.
But there are other questions in no
| way vital which do not effect these in
| evitable results, and the consideration
of hich craftsmanship would impose
| upon us. Have we not Imposed too
heavy fine upon the South
as the consequence of the war
Have we MT punished her, although
sister wealth, ten times more
severely that France was punished by
the alien invader? If Germany as
tonished the world in exactiUg five
milIiards from France, what must
be thought of the fine of ten mIlliards,
which, estimating each slave at five
hundred dollars, was imposed upon
the South 10y the proclamation of
emancipation? Should not some COM
peDsatiOn be made to the South for
this enormous fine rot in the way of
actual money paid to former slavehOl-
ders, but in the development eff indus
tries in the South that were destroyed
by the war? II VIC of the Northern
States for generations sustained, APP
proved amt profited by slavery, when
1t was an institution, should we not
assume some OF the expense and re-
sponsibility of regarding it as crime?
Because we conquered the South have