The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1890-09-25
JUDGE CONNOR's STATEMENT.

Some years ago in reading Ban
croft's History OF the United States,
Vol. II, page 1873, edition 1854, (hf-
teenth,) l was impressed with the fol-
lowing language, in regard to the
early settlers of North Carolina.
"The planters of the Albemarle
were men who had been led to the
choice of their residence from a hatred
Of restraint, and had lost themselves
in the woods in search Of independ-
ence. Are there any z0h0 10nbf mans
lataeiy for sey,goOernment, let them
sfady the History of N0rtA Car0lina,'
its inhabitants were restless and turbu-
lent in their imperfect submission to a
government imposed upon them from
abroad, the administration of the col
ony was firm, humane and tranquil
when they were left to take care of
themselves. Any government but one
of their own institution was Oppress-
i've"
In view of the spirit manifested by
the W0llc lllCu "a tLS StatS iolli loOo
to 1876, this language was to my mind
significant of the truth that the genius
of a people may be traced through
their history for many generations.
Bancroft was writing of the men of
North Carolina Of 1867.
The language evidently impressed
other North Carolinians. We find
Senator Ransom, in his great speech,
delivered in the United States Senate,
February the II, 1875, quoting the
words of the historian with evident
pride and satisfaction. Again Mr..
Daniel X. Goodloe, in an article in
titled. "The Colonial Period" in
Wheeler's "reminiscences, at page Il,
quotes SO much of the foregoing Ian
guage as is in italics.
Rev. DR.. Vass, in his admirable
work on the early history OF the Pres
byterian Church in North Carolina
also copies Mr.. Bancroft's language
and Col. VIM. H. S. Burgwyn, in his
intensely interesting address at ChapeI
Hill. for which all of us are undei
lasting obligations, quotes the splendid
compliment to those who, in the for.
ests of Eastern Carolina, planted the
seeds of civil liberty and local self
Government, more than two hundred
wears ago. 1t would have seemed thai
the lust need of praise was scared tt
these men, and that their place in ths
history of the State firmly fixed by tht
work Of the great historian. Strange
to say, in the edition Of the History o
1876, Vol. I, page 564, we find tina
Mr.. Bancroft entirely omits all OF th'
language which l have italicized; 81
that it would seem for some reason h
had changed his opinion that the his
tory of our State afforded vlndlca
ton of the capacity of men for self
government" Itmay be that the tur
bulent, restless spirit which these mel
manifested towards a government
"imposed upon them from abroad,
made different impression upon hi
mind when their descendants by tn
same spirit were turbulent and res.les
under the domination of strangers ant
aliens in blood and sympathy fror
1863 to 1876. Without undertaken
the task of specializing upon the mo
tives which prompted the change i
the "revised edition we are taugt
the necessity of preserving the memo
rials of our own history and the dar
ger of intrusting them to the keepln
of others. If so eminently talr an
lust a man Mr. Bancroft permits tn
events of the last twenty-five years
30 affect him, what may we expe'
from the present generation OF histoi
makers like Lodge, McMasters an
Roosevelt A single event occurs
my mind. Mr.. Henry Adams IN h
"Life of John Randolph" (Amerlcsa
-StatesmanJ at page 81 says that Il