The Columbus dispatch. (Columbus, Miss.) 19??-1922, 1920-03-24

should fall on the Southern people
It's value was 00,000,000. The
people of the South had invested
their money in slave property, de-
pending upon the sacred guarantees
of the federal constitution. Slavery
came by law; was protected by law
The South was no more responsible
for it than the north. The whole
country should have borne the loss
The remedy should have been q
national one. Feeling ran so high,
70 settlement could be had except by
arms, Slavery was part of the in
dustrial and social system Of the
South; sudden change would have
bankrupted the South 1t was the
main property of the South. When
Great Britain and other nations freed
the slaves in their colonies, it was
done by gradual emancipation, and
the owners were compensated for
their loss, but the South, though not
responsible for it, was forced to
| stand the entire loss.
The issue was forced on the South.
The guarantees for the protection of
their property had been brushed aside
and they We're face to face with the
proposition, whether they would Sub
nit to the ultimatum of the north,
which meant the loss of their proper
| ty, or fight to preserve the sacred
guarantees Of the constitution. Like
a brave and chiyaifons pe)p'e, the
South decided to battle foc the con-
stitution as handed down b. Der
forefathers.
state here that even we of the
South would not have slavery restor-
ed. The sentiment of the world is
against it, and we, too, feel that way
now. But let our own children know
that we did not fight to maintain
slavery, but for CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS. Slavery was being extin-
guished in the border states, and in a
little while would have disappeared
but our northern brothers, after get.
ting rid of and getting paid for THEN
slaves, wanted to force us to get rio
of them at once and bear the entire
loss. No chivalric people would have
ever submitted to such arbitrary los.
of property, and it was the misfor.
tune of the South that it was forced
ON her, and she had to bear the loss
of war and her property also.
This brings US now to a few fact
as to secession and notification
"New England historians always rco
resent their section as loyal to thu
union and abhorrent to any scheme o
notification and dis-union, and n,
: terms of utilization or obloquy ar
too severe for the South, and yet Sc
cession had its genesis in New En-
gland, and in not a few instances
when her material interests were ap
parently endangered, has she insiste,
! on her rights of resistance even t
notification or separation. And tn
! reproach of dis-union has been slippe,
from the shoulders of the north L
, those of the South"
Threats of dis-union were made b!
: high officials in Massachusetts an,
Connecticut in 1856, 1894, and 1896
= Governor Plummer, in 1905, affirme,
/ the purpose of New England leaders
whose names he gives, was to dis
, solve the urion. John Quincy Adam
: states that the plan was so mature'
that a military leader was selecte,
to carry it into execution, The!
! called the Hartford Convention int
existence. This convention of dele
/ gates appointed by the legislatures o
, three of the New England states, an'
/ the delegates from counties in Yer
, mont and New Hampshire, said;
"ln cases of deliberate, dangerous
; and palpable infractions Of the con
: stitution, affecting the sovereignty o