Year: 1861

To all men of right sentiments, the greatest
possible solace, when engaged in an arduous and
perilous contest is the assurance that their cause
is just. This solace the South, and especially
Virginia, may now enjoy in reference to the
controversy with the North, which has long been
pending, and which has at last been brought to
the stern arbitrament of arms. There are two
questions which may be raised on this point:
First, are We right with respect to the claim
which is in dispute and secondly, are we right
in defending our position with the sword? There
need be no hesitation in answering both these
questions in the affirmative but will, in this
communication, confne myself to the first, re-
serving the other for future time.


The origin of the difficulty between the two
sections of the country is found in the opinion,
held by one and rejected by tho other, that sla-
very is wrong as being violation of a natural
right to liberty and equality, which is alleged to
belong to every human being. There are many
subordinate and collateral questions, which have
been intermingled with the discussion but this
main question is the only one which has had i'm
portance enough to make it dangerous. This is
strictly moral question, question of duty;
and like all such questions it ought to be deci-
ded by the Rule which has been given us for the
express purpose of teaching what duty God re-
qures of man. This Divine Rule plainly teach
es that slavery is not wrong in ITSELF while it
condemns its abuses, as it does the abuses of
everything else. This | attempted to prove,
SOu0 years ago, III d SUITES VI l6tIGrS
in the ssSpectatOr," on the ssScripture View of
Slavery" Anti-slavery men do not pretend to
find in the Bible an express prohibition of sla-
very; but assuming without reason that it is
ssthe sum of all villanies,'' when they refer to
Scripture at ALL they exhaust their efforts in PROV
ing, what nobody denies, that God condemns all
oppression, and in the vain attempt to set aside
the evidence that slavery was expressly permit
ted by the Old Testament, and allowed in the
Christian Church by the Apostles. But the most
thorough abolitOnsts deny the authority of
Scripture altogether, while the others generally
prefer some other source of argument. rr


But supposing the institutions of the South to
be wrong, the citizens of the Northern States
have no more right to alter or abolish them than
they have to change the Government of Great
Britain. But such has been the force of fanati-
cism, that great numbers have avowed the pur-
pose of putting an end to these institutions, and
have even violated plain constitutional cbliga-
tions by the action of State Legislatures.


Ii the Southern people had taken measures for
even the gradual removal of involuntary servi-
tude, as the North has been constantly urging
them to do, they would have committed sin
against their servants, against themselves and
against God; for they would have done that
which, according to all human probability, would
have been injurious alike to the white and color
ed race. Still more disastrous would be the re-
suit of permitting the North to do the same
thing, for it would be done less wisely, because
with less knowledge of the circumstances of the
case. Any one who will fairly observe the ten
dency of things at the North, must see that they
are tending towards this point. The conserva-
tive men, so called, have been constantly losing
in numbers, in firmness and in influence; while
the most dangerous class of abolitionists, those
of the Snmner and Grooly school, have been be-
coming more audicious and successful. IL has
been therefore matter of vital Importance to
the South to resist all Northern aggression on
this subject. '9 L. E.