The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1902-08-27
THE CAUSES OF THE WAR.
An Essay Read at the Reunion of Orr's
Regiment of Rifles at Due West, Au-

q the late Joel ID. Charles, a gallant officer
8 Orr's Rifles. She is one of the most inte
lectual women in the State, q graduate {
, Converse College, and has taken cours
at the University of Chicago
The Civil War, the War of the Re
: bellion, or the War of Secession, as
is variously termed, according to one
point of view, was but the natural con
sequence of three facts of long exist
ence. The Puritans of New Englant
and the Cavaliers of Virginia were BY
no means possessed of similar habit,
of thought and life in the very be
ginning, and their different climate:
and occupations served but to in
crease this difference i'm their ma
lures. Next, there were lacking
the modern avenues of intercourse
between the two sections, and be.
because of this lack of acquaintance
they became suspicious and estranged.
Most important of all, they had differ
ent ideas of the constitution of the
United States. Had all other causes
been wanting this alone would have
been sufficient to produce the terrible
upheaval of 1861.
cone party held that under the
terms of the constitution the Union
is indissOluble that the sovereignty
of the nation is lodged in the central
government that the States are sub
ordinate /; that all acts of Congress are
binding on The States that the highest
allegiance of citizen is due TO the
central government, and not his own
State and that all attempts at NULL.
fication and disunion are in their ma
ture disloyal and reasonable. The
other party held that the constitution
is compact between the sovereign
States that for certain reasons the
Union may be dissolved that the
sovereignty of the nation is lodged in
the individual States, and not in the
general government; that Congress can
exercise no other than delegated pow
ers that a State, feeling aggrieved,
can annul an act of Congress that the
highest allegiance cf citizen is due
to his own State, and not to the CEN
trail government and that acts of null
LITIGATION and disunion are justGable,
revolutionary, and honorable" Rid
path.
AT first the Northern States were
the closest adherents to this doctrine
of States Rights, but later, with the
rise of the tariff question: question
of dollars and cents-a change occur
red. The tariff, a Congressional meas
u"e, favored the manufacturing section
at the expense of the agricultural Sec
ton; hence 1t was but natural that the
North should favor protective tariff
and a government, that would force the
States. -
The ordinance of secession passe
Dec. 20, 1860, was not the first, but
the last expression of the constitutions
al and admitted right of State to
withdraw from the Union for just
cause. In the Kentucky and Virginia
Resolutions of 1898, drawn by Jeffer-
son and Madison was the first express
sion. In these resolutions it was dis
tinctly stated that since the constitu-
ton was compact between the States
and the government, State has a
right TO nullify a Fed ,ral law when
that law infringes upon its rights.
In the early years of the republic
the balance of power between the
North and the South was nicely pre-
served. The slave and the free States
were evenly matched. In 1919, how
ever, when the question of the admis-
sion of Missouri arose, an attack was
made upon the institution of slavery,
and in the bill slavery was forbidden in
the new State. The bill passed the
House but was defeated In the Senate.
BY the Missouri Compromise of 1920
slavery was permitted in Missouri, but
was forbidden in all States north of 3G
deg. 80 min. From this time ON TO 1861
American political history is story of
the increase in importance of the Free
Soil movement and the development
of the Democratic party into one whose
first object was the maintenance of
slavery and the perpetuation of the
power of the slave States.
With each application of State for
admission into the Union came repe-
tition of the struggle between the two
parties. The last States to apply for ad-
mission before the war were Kansas
and Nebraska Q857), both barred to
slavery by the Missouri Compromise.
The Kansas N ebrasba bill practically
proposed to repeal the Missouri Com.
promise as unconstitutional in that it
had allowed interference with slavery,
and left it to the people of each Terri
tory to decide for or against slavery.
Each party began to pour settlers into
the Territories, and at first the South
was successful, but with its smaller
population it was only q matter of time
when the North would finally secure
the reins of government in Kansas and
forbid slavery.
Thus we see the balance of power
passing into the hands of party inim.
ical to the interests of the South,
pledged TO the abolition of slavery and
TO commercial system of protection
unfavorable TO an agricultural commu.
nity like the South. The South was
not devoted TO q servile system. The
greatest statesmen deplored it and
hoped at some day 10 see it abolished
but it was an established fact--the fac,
upon which rested the entire fabric ol
Southern life. just as reasonably asl
the men of the North to close theil
q eat mills as TO ask the men of the
South to free their slaves. That sucl
i, was what the North was determines
not TO ask the South tc do, but to de
mand of them, is clearly shown by tn,
following extracts from documen
known as " Helpers Book" publicl
recommended by Sherman, Of Ohio, IL
| n S,naction with aixtu.eioht othar Ra