The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-04-27
WELL. LET Us sUrrosE.


Another discussion Of the what
might have been" Is precipitsted by a
recent paper from Joseph E. Chamber
lain in his offs Of history" As a pre-
Jude he quotes Charles Francis Adams
as saying In 1s73: One single hour
of the will displayed by General Jack
son would have stifled the fire in its
cradle"-aIludins to the fire of seces-
sion. Though we do not exactly see
the connection between fire and the
cradle we will not discuss that point
In the same year that Mr. Adams made
| that ASSERTION Hon. Montgomery Blair
with equal positiveness Of assertion
said: IF we could have held Fort
Sumter there never would have been a
drop of blood she'd" Commenting on
these expressions Mr.. Chamberlain
| says: .
The secession movement was at first
| concentered In the state of South Caro-
lima. That state, all through the WIN
ter of 1s6o-'61, was presenting to the
successful notification. In 1888 South
Carolina had ordained notification.
| but its ordinance was so
instantly and heavily sat upon by
President Andrew jackson that the
state was absolutely unable to carry
now, in 1850, 1t did not merely ordain
| nullification--it enacted 1t. Every fed
eral Judge every judicial servant, and
nearly every federal official In South
Carolina. resigned, and the nation was
left without an agent to enforce it's
laws, for no new ones were sent in.
The United States authority In the
state was at an end, save for the GUS
tom house at Charleston and Fort
Moultrie In Charleston harbor AS
long as South Carolina was let alone,
her case plainly said to all the other
slave states. You see, we can with
drawn from the Union; and the Union
takes no step to keep US in; you can
do the same thing"
Here is displayed a singular misun-
derstanding of facts or misapplication
of argument. Notification was not
secession. and South Carolina made no
attempt to secede in 1893. That state
proposed to nullify the tariff laws then
in force and declared that she would
resist any attempt on the part, of the
United States government to enforce
said laws. 1t is true that 1t was
claimed or asserted that any attempt
to enforce the Objectionable tariff
would justify the state in seeding.
The position of South Carolina was
untenable and fndefensible from the
start The tariff laws then in force
were enacted in a regular and consti-
tutional way and were binding on all
the States alike. Conceding the right
of a State to secede does not carry
| with 1t the right to resist the enforce
ment of a constitutional Federal law
and at the same time, remain in the
| union. Such doctrine, once estab-
lished and admitted, would make the
general government a nonentity and
prevent 1t from carrying out and en-.
forcing any law enacted by Congress
and approved by the President, If such
law should be obnoxious to any State.
Such a contention was absurd and
could not stand for a moment Presi-
dent Jackson adopted the only course
open to him, for he had sworn to
execute the laws and could not as an
honest man do anything else. He was
a Southerner, a Shareholder and was
opposed to the protective tariff sys-
TEN. but he was also President of the
United States and bound to see that
the laws were enforced. That was not
such a difficult job in this instance.
because the notification sentiment
was by no means general and popu-
lar in any part of the South. What
Jackson would have done in case South
Carolina had actually seeded is alto
gether a matter of conjecture. To in
sist that If Buchanan had possessed
Jackson's spirit and determination he
could have prevented the States from
seeding is very wild guess. We do
not know that Jackson could have pre-
vented 1t. neither do we know that he
would have attempted to do So We
do not know what course he would
have pursued nor what success he
would have met with If conditions had
been as they were in 1861 and he had
tried to use the big stick on the
States
The assertion of Mr.. Blair is entitled
to still less consideration. To claim
that II the Federals could have held
Fort Sumter there would have been no
blood shed would indicate that the
speaker lad little recollection or
knowledge of the conditions then ex-
listing, and that he held a very poor
opinion OF the South and the Southern
people. Fort Sumter surrendered
April IS, 1861. At that time seven
States had already seeded, the Con-
federate government had been orga-
nized in Montgomery. a President ana
Vice President elected and the Con-
federate States of America was an
organized government The fire of
secession was no longer in it's cradle
the spirit of resistance was surglng
and boiling throughout the South and
the entire section was alive with en-
thusiasm and patriotism.
To claim that the failure of the con-
federates to capture Sumter would
have caused the Confederate govern
ment to dissolve. the Southern armies
to disband and the Southern people to
lost heart and abandon the struggle.
is to place a very low estimate on the
South. The failure to capture Fort
Sumter would have had no more eff