The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-04-05

any Southern institution. The entfrs corps of 500 students met and demanded his resignation. Tire trustees and faculty joined in this request. He went directly to Boston and had his infamous, sian derous book published and thrown broad. cast over the North.
 At this juncture the Dred Scott eas< came up for adjudication in the Supreme Court of the United States. The court sustained slavery as 1t then existed ir the Southern States.
 The platform upon which Lincoln was nominated repudiated this decision of the Supreme Court. The judges and Presi- dent Buchanan. who sustained this de cision were denounced by the Abolition. ists. Dred Scott, slave, had escaped from Southern State He was aided and protected by the anti-slavery ele- ment of the North. This decision enabled his owner to demand and obtain posses sion of his property; he was brought back to Richmond and sold as. a slave. The purchaser was one McDaniel of Nash County, North Carolina, at a very re- duced price commensurate with his size and personal appearance. No planter was desirous of having him with his demoralixing influence among his other negroes. It was the privilege of the writer to have been in Washington. D. C., during these exciting scenes and circum- stances that subsequently, startled the world. He was the guest of Alabama s distinguished Senator, c, c. Clay. He saw Dred Scott at the home of the pur- chaser, Mir. McDaniel Dred was a fine looking black negro man about six feet in height and weighed 1so pounds. Mir. Lincoln, the anti-slavery candidate. was elected over the Democratic nominee. \ NT Lincoln was inaugurated March I. 1861. upon the above platform. His advisers were ultra black Republicans whose hat red of the Southern people was foretold. They cast their shadow before them which forewarned us what to expect at the hands of these interruptions fanatical partisans.
 It is now too late to discuss what should have been done by the Southern Confed- eracy. think, however, it is a conceded
 opinion among thinking men. that | would have been best for the Southern States not to have seeded as they did; however. they should have fought the war under the old flag, claiming it as our rightful inheritance as fought for by our forefathers and handed down to these sovereign States as an inherent right to fight under 1t now as then. justified as we were when our constitutional rights were being abridged and trampled upon by the interruptions majority. These sentiments of mine opposing secession were forcibly argued pending the question of severance of the tie between the States by one of the brainiest and far seeing men I ever knew, the late Hon. ex-Governor w. M. Fishback. He advocated if the war had to be fought, fight it in the union, under the old flag, that we were not justified in discarding 1t. but to fight under it as did our forefathers when lighting for the same principles that we of the South were advocating self government as guaran- teed to us by the Constitution.
 This brainy man stumped the State of Arkansas and before the convention that met to decide this momehtous question of the rise or fall of the Confederacy. The far-seeing future predicted by this brainy man was er-shadowed by people whose vision was obstructed by impulse. not by sober judgment.
 While we knew what to expect of these fanatics, yet 1t would have been better to have waited until some overt act had been perpetrated by those in power. The war came on we fought for principle, we made a good fight, yet think the attack upon Fort Sumter was premature. It made the people of the Southern States the aggressors. subsequently, the Confed- crate troops had to recede from this ag- Rressiveness and act upon the defensive. We were lacking in numbers. we were too weak our territory and resources were prescribed. The North had the treasury, the navy. the army. the world to draw from for men and supplies. The