The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1902-09-23
WAR NOT FOR SLAVERY.
Reply to an Article by Mr.. ID. j.
COrbett, Sr.
Editors Messenger:

Editors Messenger:
On September eth you published a
letter from Mr.. D. ]. Corbett, ST., CO
Keith. in which there was a emark
which /, as one who fought for tie
Co%nfederacy, am unwilling to let pass
without comment. Although Mr.. Cor
bett does not make the charge that the
war was waged On the part of the
south in defense of and for the per-
petuatiOn of African slavery, he uses
language which the uniformed can
easily interpret to involve sue q
charge; and such an Interpretation
cOuld not do violence to public senti-
ment in many sections of the south,
for thousands of men and women ali
over the south have heard little or
read little that was intended to do jus
tice to the motives of the people of
the C~onfederacy during the sixties.
Permit me, then, to lay before o
readers a brief summary of the evil
dence on which a correct judgment can
be
l. The long controversy between the
north and the south, so far as the ne
gro slave appeared as a factor, WAS
simply whether the control of Federal
legislation should be permanently
fixed in the hands of the one section
vi Tx ONlC ny llC VI III
exclusion of slavery in the territory
acquired from France and Mexico.
Such, it was never denied, was the
issue when the Missouri compromise,
so-called, was adopted and nobody
ever pretended that the north had d
right to NEEDLE with slavery in the
slave states.
2. In 1860 the platform of the party
which elected Abraham Lincoln de-
clared for the maintenance inviolate
of the rights of the states, and es-
pecially the right of each state to or
der and control it's own domestic in
situations according to its own judg-
ment exclusively"
8. ~Seventy-four days after the seces-
sion of South Carolina and twenty
eight days after the inauguration of
h Confederacy, Abraham Lincoln
sale in his inaugural address: Il have
no urpoS directly or indirectly, to
interfere with the institution of slav-
cry in the states where it exists. 1 be-
lieve I have no lawful right to do
So"
1. In April, 1861, Mr.. Lincoln inaug-
urated his war subiuation. and no
where in his orders or Instructions or
messages was the abolition Of slavery
announced as one OF the objects he had
in view.
5. After the war had been going on
twelve months Mr.. Lincoln disap-
pTONCu al VI IL III 2SSoCb
by Gen. Hunter, in which he tHurter)
declared slavery abolished il his dis
trict."
There is, therefore, not a shadow OF
reason for the belief hat the war be-
tween the sections was what = Chicago
newspaper some time g called q
slavery war" Nobody in the south
was prepared to believe during the
first year of the war that the Wash
ington government would attempt to
do what Mr.. Lincoln acknowledged the
constitution did not authorize il to do;
and 1T is not creditable to h heads
or the hearts OF the men ana boys OF
the south to assert that they endured
all the h~ardships and risks OF a four
years war in order that slavery could
be perpetuated.
In further confirmation of the view
here presented the emancipation pro-
clamation, so-called, may be cited as
unimpeachable evidence . That pa
per did not include among its proposed
beneficiaries a single slave in Mary
land, West Virginia, Kentucky, Mis-
souri,, in thirteen counties in louisiana,
or seven counties in Eastern Virginia.
Indeed, no slave outside the Confed-
crate lines was to be set free by its
operation: and, if anybody thinks that
proclamation was inspired by senti-
rnants of regard for he slaves, let him
examine the proceedings Of the house
OF representatives on h 10th Of jan
.uary. 1S49. He Will find that Abraham
Lincoln introduced a bill to extend the
then existing ENTHUSIASTICALLY over
the District of Columbia, which oy an
oversight had been omitted IroI2 lrs
operation. b. +. GfAD1.
Clinton, n. c., Sept, %, 1902.