Taking for his first position, that foreign
nations viewed the Jeff Davis movement as a revolution, self-sustained
for nearly a year, his second was, that the most enlightened American
abolitionists, as well as the most conservative Federalist, coincided in
the belief that disunion was ultimate emancipation. Then, acquiescing in
the statement of his antagonist, that the English nation had always
reprehended American slavery, and desired its speedy overthrow, he
inquired what more inconsistency there was in the English nation
construing disunion in the same way wherein the American abolitionist
and conservative Unionist did, as the inevitable promotion of slavery's
overthrow? When it was rejoined that the canker of slavery had eaten
away many bonds of Union, and promoted secession, the English disputant
demanded whether the war aimed at rebuking slavery in a practical way,
or by strengthening it as a locally constitutional institution? When the
question was begged by the assertion that recognition of the Southern
confederacy, although granted to be of abolition tendencies, was
ungenerous and unfraternal, the position assumed was that nations, like
individuals, cherished self-love, and always sought to turn intestine
troubles among competitive powers into the channels of
home-aggrandizement; and it was asked whether, should Ireland maintain
a provisional government for nearly a year, there would not be found a
strong _party_ in the States advocating her recognition?
But Mr.
Pages:
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273