north america-1-第103章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


me；　or　the　discussions　on　the　subject　of　Slidell　and　Mason；　in　which　I　felt　myself　bound　to　take　a　part。　　Up　to　that　period　I　confess　that　my　sympathies　had　been　strongly　with　the　Northern　side　in　the　general　question；　and　so　they　were　still；　as　far　as　I　could　divest　the　matter　of　its　English　bearings。　　I　have　always　thought；　and　do　think；　that　a　war　for　the　suppression　of　the　Southern　rebellion　could　not　have　been　avoided　by　the　North　without　an　absolute　loss　of　its　political　prestige。　　Mr。　Lincoln　was　elected　President　of　the　United　States　in　the　autumn　of　1860；　and　any　steps　taken　by　him　or　his　party　toward　a　peaceable　solution　of　the　difficulties　which　broke　out　immediately　on　his　election　must　have　been　taken　before　he　entered　upon　his　office。　　South　Carolina　threatened　secession　as　soon　as　Mr。　Lincoln's　election　was　known；　while　yet　there　were　four　months　left　of　Mr。　Buchanan's　government。　　That　Mr。　Buchanan　might；　during　those　four　months；　have　prevented　secession；　few　men；　I　think；　will　doubt　when　the　history　of　the　time　shall　be　written。　　But　instead　of　doing　so　he　consummated　secession。　　Mr。　Buchanan　is　a　Northern　man；　a　Pennsylvanian；　but　he　was　opposed　to　the　party　which　had　brought　in　Mr。　Lincoln；　having　thriven　as　a　politician　by　his　adherence　to　Southern　principles。　　Now；　when　the　struggle　came；　he　could　not　forget　his　party　in　his　duty　as　President。　　General　Jackson's　position　was　much　the　same　when　Mr。　Calhoun；　on　the　question　of　the　tariff；　endeavored　to　produce　secession　in　South　Carolina　thirty　years　ago；　in　1832excepting　in　this；　that　Jackson　was　himself　a　Southern　man。　　But　Jackson　had　a　strong　conception　of　the　position　which　he　held　as　President　of　the　United　States。　　He　put　his　foot　on　secession　and　crushed　it；　forcing　Mr。　Calhoun；　as　Senator　from　South　Carolina；　to　vote　for　that　compromise　as　to　the　tariff　which　the　government　of　the　day　proposed。　　South　Carolina　was　as　eager　in　1832　for　secession　as　she　was　in　1859…60；　but　the　government　was　in　the　hands　of　a　strong　man　and　an　honest　one。　　Mr。　Calhoun　would　have　been　hung　had　he　carried　out　his　threats。　　But　Mr。　Buchanan　had　neither　the　power　nor　the　honesty　of　General　Jackson；　and　thus　secession　was　in　fact　consummated　during　his　Presidency。　But　Mr。　Lincoln's　party；　it　is　saidand　I　believe　truly　said　might　have　prevented　secession　by　making　overtures　to　the　South；　or　accepting　overtures　from　the　South；　before　Mr。　Lincoln　himself　had　been　inaugurated。　　That　is　to　say；　if　Mr。　Lincoln　and　the　band　of　politicians　who　with　him　had　pushed　their　way　to　the　top　of　their　party；　and　were　about　to　fill　the　offices　of　State；　chose　to　throw　overboard　the　political　convictions　which　had　bound　them　together　and　insured　their　successif　they　could　bring　themselves　to　adopt　on　the　subject　of　slavery　the　ideas　of　their　opponentsthen　the　war　might　have　been　avoided；　and　secession　also　avoided。　　I　do　believe　that　had　Mr。　Lincoln　at　that　time　submitted　himself　to　a　compromise　in　favor　of　the　Democrats；　promising　the　support　of　the　government　to　certain　acts　which　would　in　fact　have　been　in　favor　of　slavery；　South　Carolina　would　again　have　been　foiled　for　the　time。　　For　it　must　be　understood；　that　though　South　Carolina　and　the　Gulf　States　might　have　accepted　certain　compromises；　they　would　not　have　been　satisfied　in　so　accepting　them。　　The　desired　secession；　and　nothing　short　of　secession；　would　in　truth　have　been　acceptable　to　them。　　But　in　doing　so　Mr。　Lincoln　would　have　been　the　most　dishonest　politician　even　in　America。　　The　North　would　have　been　in　arms　against　him；　and　any　true　spirit　of　agreement　between　the　cotton…growing　slave　States　and　the　manufacturing　States　of　the　North；　or　the　agricultural　States　of　the　West；　would　have　been　as　far　off　and　as　improbable　as　it　is　now。　　Mr。　Crittenden；　who　proffered　his　compromise　to　the　Senate　in　December；　1860；　was　at　that　time　one　of　the　two　Senators　from　Kentucky；　a　slave　State。　　He　now　sits　in　the　Lower　House　of　Congress　as　a　member　from　the　same　State。　　Kentucky　is　one　of　those　border　States　which　has　found　it　impossible　to　secede；　and　almost　equally　impossible　to　remain　in　the　Union。　　It　is　one　of　the　States　into　which　it　was　most　probable　that　the　war　would　be　carriedVirginia；　Kentucky；　and　Missouri　being　the　three　States　which　have　suffered　the　most　in　this　way。　　Of　Mr。　Crittenden's　own　family；　some　have　gone　with　secession　and　some　with　the　Union。　　His　name　had　been　honorably　connected　with　American　politics　for　nearly　forty　years；　and　it　is　not　surprising　that　he　should　have　desired　a　compromise。　His　terms　were　in　fact　thesea　return　to　the　Missouri　compromise；　under　which　the　Union　pledged　itself　that　no　slavery　should　exist　north　of　36。30　degrees　N。　lat。；　unless　where　it　had　so　existed　prior　to　the　date　of　that　compromise；　a　pledge　that　Congress　would　not　interfere　with　slavery　in　the　individual　Stateswhich　under　the　Constitution　it　cannot　do；　and　a　pledge　that　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　should　be　carried　out　by　the　Northern　States。　　Such　a　compromise　might　seem　to　make　very　small　demand　on　the　forbearance　of　the　Republican　party；　which　was　now　dominant。　　The　repeal　of　the　Missouri　compromise　had　been　to　them　a　loss；　and　it　might　be　said　that　its　re…enactment　would　be　a　gain。　　But　since　that　compromise　had　been　repealed；　vast　territories　south　of　the　line　in　question　had　been　added　to　the　union；　and　the　re…enactment　of　that　compromise　would　hand　those　vast　regions　over　to　absolute　slavery；　as　had　been　done　with　Texas。　　This　might　be　all　very　well　for　Mr。　Crittenden　in　the　slave　State　of　Kentuckyfor　Mr。　Crittenden；　although　a　slave　owner；　desired　to　perpetuate　the　Union；　but　it　would　not　have　been　well　for　New　England　or　for　the　West。　　As　for　the　second　proposition；　it　is　well　understood　that　under　the　Constitution　Congress　cannot　interfere　in　any　way　in　the　question　of　slavery　in　the　individual　States。　　Congress　has　no　more　constitutional　power　to　abolish　slavery　in　Maryland　than　she　has　to　introduce　it　into　Massachusetts。　　No　such　pledge；　therefore；　was　necessary　on　either　side。　　But　such　a　pledge　given　by　the　North　and　West　would　have　acted　as　an　additional　tie　upon　them；　binding　them　to　the　finality　of　a　constitutional　enactment　to　which；　as　was　of　course　well　known；　they　strongly　object。　　There　was　no　question　of　Congress　interfering　with　slavery；　with　the　purport　of　extending　its　area　by　special　enactment；　and　therefore　by　such　a　pledge　the　North　and　West　could　gain　nothing；　but　the　South　would　in　prestige　have　gained　much。　But　that　third　proposition　as　to　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　and　the　faithful　execution　of　that　law　by　the　Northern　and　Western　States　would；　if　acceded　to　by　Mr。　Lincoln's　party；　have　amounted　to　an　unconditional　surrender　of　everything。　　What！　　Massachusetts　and　Connecticut　carry　out　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law？　　Ohio　carry　out　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　after　the　〃Dred　Scott〃　decision　and　all　its　consequences？　　Mr。　Crittenden　might　as　well　have　asked　Connecticut；　Massachusetts；　and　Ohio　to　introduce　slavery　within　their　own　lands。　　The　Fugitive　Slave　Law　was　then；　as　it　is　now；　the　law　of　the　land；　it　was　the　law　of　the　United　States　as　voted　by　Congress；　and　passed　by　the　President；　and　acted　on　by　the　supr