Year: 1865

Foreign Intervention.


from the Richmond Examiner (Editoral), Monday.


Let US not be misunderstood. The inter-
ests at stake for US and for the country are
too vital and momentous to be properly
dealt with after the manner of yonnR
mems debating societies: Whether Caesar
or Hannibal was the greatest man; wheth-
er colonial vassalage be better than subiu-
cation by the Yankees; whether it would
be q good bargain to secure the material
aid of England and France bya formal sacri-
ice of our Institution of slavery; wheth-
er the human species is progressive, retro
grade, or stationary; all these questions
are quiteJnteresting, in speculative point
of view, and afford many opportunities of
excellent defamation on one side or on
the other of each proposition, only that
they are not practical nor applicable to the
present state of our country, and of the
four questions above propounded any one
is as practical and applicable as any other.


Recollect that the matter before US now
is not to prove theOrem but to solve a
problem; not to establish the most rational
conclusion upon some question of ethics
or history, but to save our own lives, our
own houses, and to transmit to our chill
dren the heritage of freedom and iudepen-
dence.


II we are asked whether or not colonial
vassalage be preferable to subiugation by
the Yankees, we say yes. Infnitely pre-
tersble. Better for US and ours not only
that We should sink back into colonists.
but that we should all die where we stand.
than be reduced to the iguominious con.
dition of Vassals to the Yankee nation.


But it happens that neither the question,
nor the answer is anything to our present
purpose, and if we are asked whether we
would or would not purchase the material
aid of England and France in our present
struggle oy abandoning slavery instantly,
and on the spot, we say again Eyes, with
out one moments hesitation or cousidera-
tion." That is to say, in other words, we
would sacrifice the negro race to insure
our own independence. But it happens
here again that the alternative is not
presented to us. We are not asked to
choose between the two except by some
essayists.


A few days ago we called attention to
the fact that our proposal to go back into
a colonial relation with Eugland or France
would be extremely unacceptable to those
nations, because if they acoeded to our
wishes it would involve them in wars, and
tie proposal itself would be full admis-
sion that we are on the point of subjuga-
ton; so that it would be inviting them to
take up a quarrel which we feel ourselves
no longer capnble OF maintaining, on the
doubtful speculation OF making US profita.
BILE dependents in the end.


No man who has the most elementary
knowledge of the policy and exigencies of
those TWO European nations would ever
form or give utterance to such a project
1t was shown at the same time that an of
fer on the part of these States to buy sup
port in Europe by cOnsentiug to abolition,
although it would be exceedingly grateful
to English and French tribes, though it
would be trumpeted over EurOpeas mighty
triumph of the rights of man, and eloquent.
ty celebrated in all the philanthropic funny
magazines, would be not only no reason to
aid US, but would be an additional reason
for abandoning US to our fate and encour-
aging our enemies to complete their con.
quest.


1t is said that we are sverse to diploma.
cy. By no means. Diplomacy is highly
respectable kind of agency for the trausac-
ton of international affairs, but We have
observed that there is not satisfactory
diplomacy between two nations, one of
which is begged for faVors and the other
sues in yformG pGuperis, one of which has
t6ullEGlS lu0 lEOAb uVDE W oil Luo SUuEl Vi
the world, and the other has to creep up
the back stairs at imminent risk of being
kicked out.


One writer suggests that there is treach-
cry in advice to rely solely upon our own
strength, and to disregard and neglect the
aid of diplomacy, Perhaps this sagacious
writer can tell us where there ia anything
else for US to rely upon than our own
strength, and what diplomacy is open to
ls, aud with Whom2


This Confederacy has never had any
other reliance than its own native strength
and resolution; has none other now, either
actual or possible, and this being the truth
we hope there is no treachery in plainly
saying so. AS to those who are now urg
ing upon the Confederate States that they
should offer to return to colonial depend
ance, or abolition of slavery, to England
and France, on condition of receiving their
material aid, We impute no odious inten-
tion to such advisers. What we mean to
say is that the counsel comes from panic;
that to follow it would be an admission Of
inevitable defeat and ruiz, which, We thank
Heaven, it is quite too soon to confess.
10