Year: 1863




BRITISH JOURNAL. ON BRITISH INJUSTICE.


Frazers Magazine for October has an able
article on "The English Press and the Ameri-
can War;" from which we extract the follow
ing:


at must be admitted, in the first place, that
the press of this country has done great aud
even cruel injustice TO the North, and has JUS
titled good deal of the feeling with which
they regard us. This has been the case in
several particulars.


"In the first place, it must be owned that a
great many of our comments on American af-
fairs have been peryaded by vndictiye CON-
placency which was altogether unworthy of us
and naturally most offensive to them. As soon
as the Southern States seeded, we all began
to exult. You have got bite of your own
crust, was the burden of our song. Rebels
and traitors as you are, how do you like trea-
son and rebellion? Wecould sympathize with
legitimate government in its resistance to
insurrection. We had right to hold India
against the Sepoys; we would reduce Ireland
to desert before we gave way to Irish rebels;
but that is because we are one Of the ancient
uations OF the world; our government holds
its power by better title than the rights of
man and the declaration of independence; you,
on the other hand, are uot legitimate power:
you are bound by principles which we repu-
date, aud those principles would force you to
concede to others the independence which
your successful wickedness wrested from us.


"This sentiment, thrown into all sorts of diff
ferent forms, but for the most part insinuated
In the shape of more or lessingcnious banter,
persaded the greater part of what was said or
written about the Americans in several of our
leading papers, especially the Times. 1t was
intensely Irritating, both because it had an air
of plausibllity, and was well fitted to catch at
tention, and also because it involved the re-
traction of the admission long since made by
all educated Englishmen that in our great con-
troversy they were right, and were justified by
the very principles ON which all our own liber-
ties were founded. Indeed, this way of writ
ing could be justified only on principles from
which nothing but universal anarchy would
follow. It tacitly imputed to the Americans
that the founders of the United States had laid
down the principle that whenever any consid-
cradle body of men chose to withdraw them
selves from the control of given government,
they ought to be allowed to do so. Such
principle was probably never held by any sane
man. 1t would not only give the South right
to repudiate the North, but it would give New
York City right to secede from the State of
New York. Nay, it would give the city of
Westminster right to secede from the city of
London, and set up for itself, with its high
baiiff for king. The principle of American
Independence was, that when a considerable
body OF men are badly governed and oppressed
by government under which they live, they
nave right to resist and withdraw from it:
and unless everything in the history of Eng
land of which we have been accustomed to
boast, from Magma Charta to the Reform bill,
was crime, this principle is perfectly true
To deny to the United States, as most of our
public writers did deny to them, the right of
putting down resistance not justified BY op-
preston, and to impose upon them the duty OF
submitting at once to any resistance whatever
whether justified or not, was equivalent 10
maintaining that chronic anarchy was the only
state of things which could exist in North
America. Could any insult be more gross and
wanton, or proceed from meaner grounds
Was it worthy Of writers who assumed to ex-
press the feelings Of a great nation, to allow
petty spite at national humiliation ninety
years ago, to induce them to disavow the fun
damental principles of English freedom?


THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WAR,


Another point in which we did great in
justice to the North was, that after a yery
short interval we totally forgot, and never
since seem to have thought it worth while TO
remember, that the Sonth alone were to blame
In the beginning of the war, and that they
were previously to blame. There are parts Of
Mr.. Cairnes's book with which we bv no
means agree; but one part of 1t is true beyond
all controversy. The southerners had for
many years governed the Union. They had
done SO with view to their own peculiar in
stitution of slavery; the object Of their policy
being to increase as far as possible the number
OF slave states, and SO keep up their power in
the Senate, and maintain aud extend that
state OF things which for economical reasons
are essential TO the existence OF slavery No
doubt it is true that slave labor is wasteiul,
superficial, inefficient and applicable only TO
the rudest processes. Hence, as the slave
population increases, an enormous area is re-
quired for its employment, and hence no doubt
the slaveowners were anxious TO make every
other consideration bend TO that of introdu-
cling new slave states into the Union II is
also quite true that this was the reason for the
bullying, staggering tone, and for the aggres-
sive policy of American politicians; and that
those who were always most insoent TO us
We're the very men who are now the leaders of
the Confederate States.


The history of the events caused by this
state OF things, from the Missouri Compromise
down 10 the war In Kansas and the Dred
Scott case, Is coming to be partially known to
English readers who care to understand Amer
lean affairs, and is well described by Mr..
Calrnes. BESIDES ,his there is every reason to
believe that TO all their other offences the
leaders OF the secession movement added at
the time of secession gross treachery, They
had in their hands the forces of the Union
and they disposed of them in such way as To
enable themselves to destroy the Union. The
first act of secession itself was provoked by
no grievance. Nobody oppressed the South
They seeded simply because a northern man
was elected President, and before they had
been interfered with in any respect whatever
In word, the South, both in what led to Sc
cession and in the act of secession ITSELF gave
as great nfovopafion To the North and hphay.
ed as Ill to them as one people could behave
10 another. All this we forgot. In most o
our leading papers the Confederates have been
the oppressed, fighting for liberty against their
federal oppressors, and we have been told that
we, the people Of England. sympathised with