Year: 1862

ult. In this article he claims to give, sub
stantiaily, his arguments upon that occa.
sion. We are sorry to say however, that
either the Professors memory is very bad, or
that he has aci!fully misrepresented much
that was then said by him. The gist of
his arg lments upon that occasion, Gas has
been uniformly the case with him on all
similar occasion,) was the negro. And the
remarks that were more particularly often
sive to men upon that occasion, were the
following That under no circumstances
should the Union be restored as it was,
touching the peculiar institution Of the
South. That he Ohe Professor) was op.
posed to policy Of this kind OH the part
Of the Government, and that lie in advance,
washed his hands from such a course of
policy"


Now Mr. Editors, many or us conscrva
tive men believe with President Lincoln,
that if the Union can bc preserved without
interfering with the pacu!ar institution of
the South, We ought to be satisfied, and
we are therefore opposed to this constant
Abolition din, of Government without
slavery, or no Government at all. In fact
zoe can see no difference in this respect be-
tween the position occupied by the Aboli-
tionists of the North, and the Secessionists
of the South. The Abol,ionists declare
their uncompromising hostility to the Union
as it was i cas- we understand ito a
Constitutional Union. And jeff Davis
and his co adjutors, do about the same
thing, ! e, they swear they will ncvcr,again
live under the Constitution as it was, and
hence there is, or can be, no Union between
these conflicting elements.


We do not propose Mr.. Editors, to an
swer every objcctonal position taken by
the Professor, in his article b. any means
for this would be spinning our article out
to an unwan,ed length, but we shall confine
our remarks to a few Of the points he has
attempted to make. The Professor claims
| in his article, that the immediate and con-
trolling cause Of the present war is slavery
Now we shall not deny that the institution
Of slavery may not be an element in our
present troubles but we do deny that it is
| the only and soul cause. We believe that
some of the constituent points Of our pre-
sent unhappy troubles are, a diversity OF
pursuits, and consequently Of interests of
the two sections Of the Union, causing in
some instances an inequality Of the appli-
cation Of our laws, and consequently an
inequality of the application of burthens
arising under them. But perhaps the great
leading and proXimate cause Of the war has
been, the crimination, and recri,ninaton Of
ambitious and unprincipled men, both from
the North and from the South, or in other
words the constant conflict Of Abolition
and Secession sentiments, until the public
mind of the two sections of the Union had
become so infected with the virus thus en-
gendered that rupture was inevitable
There are few Governments perhaps that
have not had their rebcilions and civil
wars whether the institution of slavery
constituted an element in their organism
or not-and therefore to say that rebellion,
or civil war could not exist among us bu,
for this cause Of slavery is prepoisterous,
in the face of history, both ancient and
modern. England, although negro slavery
never existed there, has had her share OF
rehellioRs--nor has the case been different
in France. In fact the rivers of blood that
were shed in the latter country during the
revolution Of 1878, was the result Of the
spirit Of rebellion, although negro slavery
was stranger to her Continental dimin.
ions. Were it necessary we might cite
many other instances i'll proof of this
position.


But the Professor says that slavery was
forced upon the north at the time the Con
stitution was framed This we deny. So
far as the Constitution recognizes the insti.
tuition Of slavery, it was the result of com
promise, and mutual conceptions on the
part of the members Of the convention, and
there was as many delegates from the free
states, that voted for wha: are called the
pro-slavery provisions Of the Constitution,
as there was of those from the south. Ac.
cording to the evidence of Luther Martin,
who was delegate in the convention from
the state of Maryland, and strenuous
opposer Of any Constitutional recognition
Of the peculiar institution, the delegates
from the n rth, were much more intent on
securing the navigation clause in the Con-
Sti,ution, than they were in their oppAsi.
ton to the negro clauses, and hence they
were entirely willing to compromise their
opposition Gf they had any to slavery in
| order to secure their commerce.


Bat owing to the iminent danger of not
sccuringa Union, and in consequence of our
danger Of foes both domestic and foreign,
the Professor says the delegates done right
in making just such Constitution as they
did negroes and all. In making this con-
cession we think the Professor has upset
his platter, and spilled his broth-or in
other words he has conceded the argument
for if the causes enumerated by him JUS
tilted the delegates in making our Cons,i.
tuition as it is much more SO do those nou
existing, justify the Government in main.
taining it in tact-at time when our very
existence as nation, is threatened by in,
ternal discord, war, and rapine-and when,
too, our nntional salvation depends upon
! the potcncy Of our organic law in an emer.