too lenient to the Southern conspirators." "Lincoln, from the very first, acted purely on the defensive; Davis, on the aggressive. Federal property was plundered and destroyed to an enormous extent, the Government flag insulted on every available occasion, Washington threatened with bombardment, and many people coerced into submission by the demagogues. Clearly the war was originated by the South, and on their heads must fall the consequences of their evil doings." Is this an impartial summing up of facts, or a foregone conclusion?

Again, "There is no doubt that justice and right are on the side of the North. The South has refused to accept all constitutional remedies for its real or supposed grievances" (we had this before from Mr. Motley), "and preferred to hew itself out of the Union amid blood and carnage of civil war. There was no need for the sword! The slave-owners have refused to allow their own people to vote on the adoption of their constitution. They are rebels, and even if they succeed in establishing their separate existence, the civil war they have inaugurated will ever remain a foul blot upon their fame." But as he adduces certain reasons for the action

*Ellison, p. 140.

of the Federal Government, it will be well to see what they are worth. His position is this :

"It became clear (A.D. 1820) to the leaders of both parties that some halfway measure would be the only method of settling the dispute; hence the support which welcomed the celebrated Amendment of Mr. Thomas, since known as the Missouri Compromise: the closing votes were:-Senate-yeas, 90; nays, 87.* House-yeas, 134; nays, 42. And be it further enacted that in all the territory ceded by France to the United States, under the name of Louisiana, which lies N. 36° 30', not included within the limits of the State contemplated by this Act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be and is hereby for ever prohibited. Provided always, that any person escaping into the same from whom labour or service is lawfully claimed in any State or territory of the United States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labour or service aforesaid.""†

"The South is strictly an agricultural country, and under slavery can never be anything else. Hence

* How can Mr. Ellison make these numbers?

† Ellison, p. 21.

her commercial interests would be best forwarded by an entire freedom of trade with the manufacturing world. But the North is a manufacturing community, and requires a protective tariff in order to enable it to compete with the cheap fabrics of Europe. The South grumbles, but requiring the aid of at least some Northern votes, to secure the integrity of the "domestic institution," Southern slaveholding Whigs have always exchanged votes with Northern Protectionist Whigs, so that a United North with but little Southern help could keep down the free-trade predilections of the South, and a United South with but a little Northern aid could keep in abeyance Northern anti-slavery measures. So the interdependence was secured: the North supplying grain, animals, machinery, and manufactures to the South ; and the South raw cotton, minerals, sugar, and rice to the North. The connection was nearly broken in 1832 by the disaffection of the South; they had often expressed themselves strongly, but were always overwhelmed by the Northern interest.”*

"The Northern manufacturers claimed that the revenue should be levied in such a way as to protect their productions against the competition of

* Ellison, p. 26.

European fabrics. Their request was granted. The same principle was acted upon in all subsequent revisions of the tariff, but the opposition of the South, at first feeble, gained strength as time grew, till in 1831, when the National Debt was nearly paid off and the revenue considerably exceeded the expenditure, the South made a decided stand, and demanded reductions of tariff." *

"In 1850, discussions on the organisation of the new territories in Mexico and Utah were renewed. Things assumed an awkward aspect; the Free Soilers were strong and determined, and their opponents equally so; the issue would doubtless have been serious had not the ingenuity of Clay bolstered and only bolstered matters by a new compromise. In this measure several old disputes were settled. Clay's proposition was that the territories should be organised on squatter sovereignty,' i. e. the settlers choose their own constitution. This was the concession of the South. On their part the Free States accepted the Fugitive Slave Clause. Constitutionally the slaveowners had held this right from 1787, but their attempts at reclamation had always been frustrated." † "The Kansas Nebraska Act expressly declares

*Ellison, p. 29.

† Ibid. p. 32.

the Missouri Compromise inoperative and void.' Down to 1854 the compact had been kept inviolate, the Mexico and Utah measures being below the compromise line. The admission of Missouri and Arkansas was one of the conditions of the compromise, and the framers never dreamt that the territories north of the line would be interfered with. The North had all along been too conciliatory, too faithful to the South; but when the slave-owners had secured the whole territory south of the line, they repudiated the compromise, and declared it unconstitutional for Congress to interfere with the constitutional organisation of the territories, and cut their northern tools." *

The consequence of which he candidly puts into the mouth of Mr. Wade, who, in a speech at Washington, announced the programme of what he has since carried out with the rest of his party (see p. 5). He then goes through the events immediately preceding the secession, commenting on President Buchanan's message to Congress, thus:

"Such a feeble, vacillating, inconsistent, pusillanimous, and glaringly partisan document was never delivered from the White House. A perusal left

*Ellison, p. 34.