The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1895-05-30

accounted for in one way or another,
bu, there has always been and always
will be a belief that the true explana,
ton Of them will be found in the future
history Of the country.
| Now, a few words about the other
great "crime" Of the Southern people
which shocked the moral sense of their
Northern brethren and caused them to
visit them with fire and sword, and lay
waste their homes.
Slavery existed in Massachusetts,
and the slave trade, in its most cruel
form, was conducted by her people for
hundred years before North Carolina
became State. Some OF the largest
fortunes in New England to-day were
based upon it. They not only imported
negroes and exported them again, but
they sold Indians also, and, worse
still, white slaves. Mrs. Earle, New
Englander, who wrote book entitled
4" Customs and Fashions in Old New
England" says among other things of
the same kind: a have never seen
in any Southern newspapers advertise
ments Of negro sales that surpass in
heartlessness and viciousness the adver
tisements Of our New England papers
of the eighteenth century. Negro
children were sold BY the p0ana, as
other merchandise. :" Even Jonathan
Edwards owned slaves, and left,
among other property, negro boy"
When Thomas Jefferson was penning
his indictment against George III, in
the Declaration of independence, he
put in as one of the outrages the fore
ing of the slave trade on the Colonies,
but it was stricken out, not only for
the proposed benefit of the Southern
States, but because it reflected on the
slave traders of Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island, whose slave shiIs
infested the seas in the traffic. Mary
land, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina and Georgia had all passed
laws either prohibiting the importation
OF slaves, or imposing a very heavy
tax per head on them. In 1886 the
North Carolina law was passed, impos
ing duty of Is per head, which was
very nearly the value of slave at
that time, but the next year the New
England and extreme Southern States
combined, and a compromise was
inserted in the Constitution by which
the slave trade was prolonged until
1903. AS domestic institution,
slavery existed in every State except
one when the Constitution was
adopted, and it was expressly provided
for in that instrument. The Supreme
Court OF tie United States, in many
cases, sole.n'.ly declared that the pro
lection OF the right of property in
slaves "was a fundamental article,
without the adoption Of which the
Union would not have been formed. |"
When the Northern States, in 1851,
were openly and defantly nullifying
the Constitution and the laws on this
subject, Daniel Webster said
81 do not hesitate to say and repeat
that if the Northern States refuse, will
fully aad deliberately, to carry into
effect that part of the Constitution
which respects the restoration of fugi-
tive slaves, and Congress provide no
remedy, the South would no longer be
bound to observe the compact. A
bargain broken on one side is broken
on all Sides
Indeed, no sane person ever raised
any question as to the provision OF the
Constitution. 1t was admitted, but
contemptuously repudiated by the
Northern States, and especially by the
New England States, while to shift
responsibility and excite sympathy of
foreign nations, they filled the air
with false cries as to the " aggressions
of the slave power" although the
South had been in the minority ever
since the Government was formed.
The true feeling was expressed by
William Cullen Bryant in the following
sentence, contained in his history OF
the United States, published since the
war:
}, Webster would not, or could not,
see that the question was not simply
of the ownership of black men, but the
supremacy of an ill-born, ill-bred,
uncducated and brutal handful ofslave-
, holders over a people Of a higher strain
, of blood, with centuries ofgentle breed
ing, and a higher degree of moral and
. intellectual training behind them
. And when the South finally sought
separation from such insolent and
treacherous associates, they 4" cried
havoc and lie. slip the dogs Of war
: upon her, denouncing her withdrawal
as treason and a slave holders rebel
. lion, and finally converting it from a
t war for the preservation OF the Union,
into a fanatiCal crusade FOR the aboli-
, ton of slavery, and the advancement
. of the negro to the fullest privileges OF
: American citizenship.
e So much for this topic, which, like
D that of secession, have merely touched
] upon, and which would require for lis
e lust and full treatment, hundred
speeches. The South did not go tn
war for slavery. AS has been said Z
: thousand times, it was the OCCASION
J, no, the cause Of the war. 1t was ar
:. institution, guaranteed and protected
y by the Constitution, as exclusiy j
II within the control of the States, anC
e when the equality and reserved right
r of the States were attacked by inter
, ference with it, there was just groune
= 10 believe that other reserved anc
'e guaranteed rights would be assaied
y and the equality oflhe States destroyed
Therefore the Southern people resortet
t, to the only remedy which had eve
j. been suggested, even by New England