4 were justifiable, simply because it is separation, as though disintegration of itself were a valuable thing. The lopping off a branch from a noble tree might as well be recommended, because it is lopping off. Is ruthless destruction more commendable than organic cohesion? The South do not fight for independence, as the British statesman pronounced it at the earliest stage of our civil war, for the very simple reason that the South never was dependent; on the contrary, it has always predominated. There is not a single point of resemblance between our Revolution and the rebellion of the South. Take our Declaration of Independence, go through the reasons given there for our separation from Great Britain, one by one, and it will be found that not a solitary one is claimed or could be claimed by the South against us. We formed distant colonies, and all large transmarine colonies are destined, in the course of history, to form, at some period or other, independent empires. Who doubts it of New South Wales? The South formed no distant dependency of ours ; no sea separates it from us ; but, on the contrary, it forms part and parcel of one great continuous country, marked as one by the dignified geography of our land and the many uniting rivers, as well as by the history of the people, and of their better institutions. Our fathers separated from England, after long hesitation, on the solemnly-avowed ground of liberty. They considered themselves oppressed; they believed all men entitled to certain rights. The South separates on the avowed ground of Slavery. That word, idolized by them, and turned away from with bitter aversion by all other men, is inscribed on their banner. There you read in red letters, Slavery, our Corner-Stone. Mr. Chevallier, in his last pamphlet, states, among many other absurdities, that the North has no ideas, but the South gallantly fights for ideas. If we are void of ideas, what then induced the many hundred thousand of our brethren and sons to march, battalion after battalion, to confront the enemy ? But even if we were very paupers in ideas, would an empty head not be better than a brain that has but one idea, and that one idea Slavery ? I make free to say to our Gallican censor, and Imperial Senator, that ideas have no value of themselves. Every thing depends upon whether the ideas are pure or vicious, wise or foolish, great oi’ little. A burglar has also his very distinct idea, for which he
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=