The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-04-06

VhioWiuS ou IulS SeCtlOudl DurQeu Uudt
the North, looking around, thereupon,
for some means to express its resentment,
bethought themselves of attacking the
institution of African slavery in the
South, in which they themselves no longer
had any interest as lave-traders or slave
owners; that between 1888 and 1860,
this assault was pressed more and more,
until is became, as the Americans used
to express it, the main sectional issue;
and that, in 1861, it was made the pre-
text OF the first of those three great civil
wars which Illustrate that history. Now
the books tell us also, that the literary
leader of this attack was a prominent
statesman of the North, a voluminous
writer and speaker, named William H.
Seward, the inventor of the "shibboleth"
of those stormy times, the Irrepressible
Conflict" A laborious research into con-
temporary documents shows us that Mr..
Seward, and all his party, were wont to
claim the principles enounced in the
Declaration of Independence" as con-
demning African slavery.
These facts, when compared, point us
to the true solution. That "Declara-
tion, which could not have been the
work of the slave-owning and slave-sell-
ing jefferson, was obviously the produc-
ton of some Abolitionist and was pro-
duced for the purpose of giving currency
to their anti-slavery opinions. The.per-
feet adaptation of this part of the "De-
claration' to that sectional end, leaves
not particle of doubt on that point. If
this conclusion needed any confirmation,
it would be found in the habit of the
Abolitionists (of which the ancient re-
cords contain so many instances) of imi-
tating the Catholic Christians" in escorts
to pious frauds" The same considera-
tions show, of course, that the date of the
real authorship must fall, not in A. D.
l776, but between the years 1888 and
1861, when the sectional movement was
begun, and when it triumphed. We are
also convinced that the author of the
Declaration of independence" was Will
liam d. Seward himself: and we are in
clined to place its production, more ex-
actly, as just prior to the year 1851, when
he began to predict the Irrepressible
Conflict
This authorship Is supported, not only
by the intrinsic probabillu, shown above,
but by these critical" cons. derations.
The theory of human rights enounced in
the Declaration is not that of the age OF
Jefferson; being the extreme democratic,
or red-repubLcan theory; which, as his
tory tells US, had become current in
America by the year 1851; and that,
very much through the teachings of Sc
ward, and his journalist, one Greedy.
Whereas, it can be proved by an adaman-
tine chain of critical evidences, that the
political philosophy of Jefferson land his
coadjutors) was less advanced. (a) They
called themselves Whigs but the Wings
of England, whence they took the name,
were constitutional monarchists. (6)
Many of Jeffersons comrades had cotem-
poraneous opportunity to put their polit-
lcal theories in practice, as George Mason
In Virginia, in the framing of constitu-
lions. But none of them established uni
versal suffrage, or full democracy: and
none of them freed the Africans. (c) JEFF
fersen was an ola1nanuS of William and
Mary College" which was founded by
the king, William of Nassau. The ia
nous John Locke was patronized by this
king; and therefore his must have been
the political philosophy of this college.
But Locke, while liberal, was no radical
democrat. Hence since the political
philosophy of the Declaration" is SO far
IN advance of the Wings" of 1776, and
so exactly accordant with that of Seward
and Greedy, seventy-fve years later, the
authorship is manifest.
Last; [ have taken the trouble to make
an induction of what may be called the
Sewardian locution and vocabulary, as
found in the Declaration" These have
been carefully learned by the reading of
his works. The result is, that enough
locutions and terms, characteristic OF