Year: 1861




speech-The "Thundercr's,, Opinion
The London Times of the 29th ult. has the
following:


=, Several years ago an article appeared in
the American newspapers, from which it
was largely copied into the English press,
suggesting scheme for organizing a govern
ment on the basis of the production and con-
sumption Of cotton. Lancashire on the one
hand, South Carolina and several of the
planting States on the other, were respect
lively. to secede from the Government of
which they formed part, and to create a
Republic situated partly on the Eastern and
partly on the Western side of the Atlantic
Ocean. Now, supposing this notable plan to
have taken effect, in what light would the
rest of England have regarded the Secession
ofthis great county Of Lancaster


Should we have gone back TO the first
grant Of the land between the Ribble and
the Morsey by William the Conqueror to
Earl Hugh Lupus, and traced the connec-
ton OF the county with the Crown of En-
gland through its Dukes to the present day?
Or should we not at once have said-"Lan-
cashire, although a county, and organized as
county, is an integral part of the domin-
ions of the Grown of England no one
individual has . right to put off his allegi-
ance, and that which no individual can do
no number of individuals can do, whether
they constitute the majority in parish, a
hundred, riding, or county--the thing is
treason, and must be at once put down2n


1t is strange that American statesmen are
only just beginning to perceive that this
plain and simple view of the subject is Just
as applicable to South Carolina as it would
be to Lancashire. So far as the central
Government is concerned there is absolutely
no difference. The American people have
ooo nj 4, ~, II
lective capacity, to create Government
possessing certain definite powers. The re-
naming functions of Government they have
left to be administered with certain terrific
rial divisions called States, and to each of
these governments, acting within its proper
powers, every American citizen is bound to
pay the same obedience as the people of En-
gland do to the laws under which they live.


Any individual citizen, therefore, seeking
to destroy this central Governments guilty
oftresson against it, and the same thing Is
true of any aggregate of individuals, even
should they constitute majority of the pop
ulation ofa State or of several States. The
fact that rebellion takes the form of the Sc
cession offs State can make no difference;
for go long as the central Government con-
tines itself within its own jurisdiction, the
State possesses no rights whatever against it,
The State possesses no greater rights collect
lively than each of its citizens possesses in
dividually.


We are glad to see that these views have
at last found expression in the elaborate
speech which Mr.. Seward, the proximate
Prime Minister of Mr.. Lincoln, has addressed
to the Senate on the state of the Union.
These principles should have been laid down
and elucidated in the message from the Presi-
dent now in Office; but, failing this, it is at
any rate something to know that they will
guide the councils of his successor. With
this important exception, however, we con-
fess that we do not see much to admire in
the speech of Mr.. Seward II was meant, no
doubt to be great success, but fortune has
not entirely seconded the efforts of the orator.


The state of affairs in America at the pres
entmoment is not favorable to merely rhetor-
ical exercitation. When a certain line of
conduct has been firmly and deliberately
adopted, oratory is very useful to convince
men of its propriety, and persuade them to
follow it. But the present difficulty of the
Federal Government is, that while provided
to safety with sophists, rhetoricians, To-
gicians and lawyers, it has no men of action,
no men who can clearly see and boldly state
the exact course which it is the duty of the
United States to take in the present emer-
gency.


The Southern leaders are afflicted with no
such scruples. Rebellion lay in their way,
and they rebelled. They do not trouble
themselves with arguments about compacts
and delegations; they are determined to
break up the Union, and for that purpose
they employ the whole energy of the States
they represent, and their own votes in the
Senate and Congress of the country against
which they are in fragrant rebellion. Mr..
Seward is evidently not a man of this mold.
He can tell us what will not save the Union.
1t will not be saved by recrimination, nor
by debates on the constitutional power of
Congress on the subject of slavery in the
Territories, nor by proving Secession to be
illegal or unconstitutional, nor by discussing
the right of the Federal Government to
coerce seeding States nor is the Union TO
be saved by Congressional compromises nor
by any person in particular, nor by some
cunning and insincere compact of concilia-
ton.


This is long list of negatives, and in the
remaining part of Mr.. Stewards speech, ex
tending over two columns of the Times, we
seek in vain for the answer of the question,
"What will save the Union ~ We have
abundance of praise Of the form of govern
ment over which destruction is impending.
We are reminded, in rather inflated Ian
guage, of the benefits which the Union has
conferred on the nation at home, and of the
strength which it has given to it abroad.
We have picture of an American man-of-
war entering European port with all the
honors, and of what the reception of an
American man-of-war is likely to be under
| a divided Confederacy. We have a contrast
drawn between Young and Old America in
the persons of the page and the clerk of the
Senate, the former of whom seems to be car
ried away by the rhetoric, while the elder is
shocked by the treason of the Southern
orators, just as the younger Jews rejoiced,
while the elder, who remembered the glories
nnFG 81, HI.