Year: 1861




there are many modes in which the insti-
tuition Of slavery may be successfully at
tackled without violating the forms of the
Constitution. The Supreme Court Of the
United States ni ght be SO constituted as
to become a servlle instrument in the
hands of Aboltionists. The financial and
commercial system of the Government
might be SO arranged as to discriminate
between the products of free and slave Ia
Dor. The appointing power might be SO
exercised as to make the possession of
slave virtual disqualification for office
and so as to Fill the Southern States with
Northern emissaries Of the anti-slavery
party, and on an anti-slavery platform
In comparison with this, the abolition of
slavery in the District of CoIumbia-the
prohibition of the slave trade between the
States-the repeal Of the fugitive Slave
law-even the refusal to admit State in
to the Union, because it tolerated slavery
would, i'll my opinion, be separately or
all combined, of trihing Importance
However, oppressive or unjust those acts
might be, they would not directly endan-
ger the institution of slavery in the States
where it already exists. But the election
of the Chief Magistrate by soch rarty
upon such principles, is the Inauguration
OF a new system Of policy ; it is not only a
proclamation to the world that the powers
of the General Government are henceforth
to be directed towards the extinction of
slavery, but it affords the means of accom-
plishing this object. In fact, it is, in ey
erything but in name, a revolution.


1t is not surprising, therefore, that the
people of the Southern States should be
alarmed at this startling innovation, aud
IL l., i
resist it. rejoice to find this determination
so universal among our citizens. So far
as | can learn, there is but little difference
OF OF opinion among them on that point
The only question is, how shall the resis-
State should take no action, except upon
consultation with the other Southern
States. Others think, on the contrary,
that she should take separately and in
dependently such course as her Judgment
may dictate.


In the latter opinion I fully concur,


| admit that it IS desirable that the
Southern States should, as soon as possible
adopt some general plan Of cooperation.
But, as regards a preliminary conference
between them, there are several obi ections
which appear to me inseparable. The
first is the delay which would necessarily
attend it. In carrying it out it would be
requisite that the Legislatures of the fifteen
Southern States should convene and dis
cuss it. Supposing (what is not at all
probable) that all, or even a majority of
them concurred in the proposition,i it would
be necessary that they should authorize
an election of delegates to the convention,
and that this election should take place
Several months, therefore, would proba-
bly, elapse before the convention could
meet. AS it would be a very numerous
body, and would present fine oppor.u-
nifty for the display of oratory, it is prob
able that a month or two more would
elapse before the close Of its de1i5era-
tions,


The second objection is, that it is by no
means certain that the convention could
agree upon any plan that would be salts
factory even to the body itself When
we see such difference of opinion even
among the citizens Of the same State, it is
hardly probable that the delegates of fifteen
States would lind it an easy matter to
come to an understanding


Thirdly, Even if the convention should
agree upon mode of proceeding, it would
have to be submitted to the States for their
approval or rejection, SO that, after all, we
WOulu come Oack TO the point from W1Icn
we started, to wit: separate State ac-
ton.


Fourthly. But the most conclusive ar
gument against preliminary convention
is that, it ever practicable, the time for it
has passed. TIVE States, South Carolina
and Mississippi, have already determined
on separate State action. 1t is understood
that Florida is nearly unanimous in favor
of the same course, ond there is every rea-
son to believe that Virginia, North Caro-
lima, Georgia, Alabama and Texas will
adopt the same mode Of proceeding. As
regards those States that have not yet
moved in the matter, it is fair to presume
that, if they shall determine to move they
will be governed in their course by the
existing State of facts, and will hardly
commit the absurdity OF asking Of States
that will have already adopted their course
to confer with them on the proper course
TO be adopted; but, on the contrary, will
cooperate with them in the only way in
which cooperation can be effectual, name
ly, by following their example.


For these reasons am Of opinion that
as matters now stand, separate State action
is not only the best but the only Practlca-
bic mode OF proceeding.


These, gentlemen, are my views on the
subject to which your letter refers. 1t is
not, assure you, without reluctance that