to reestablish slavery in the Free States? Has the South ever sought, either directly or indirectly, or does she now seek, to exercise any control over, or in any manner to interfere with, the domestic institutions or governments of the Free States? Does the South deny to the North any right which the Constitution accords? Or does she ask for herself anything more than the recognition of her equality under the great charter of confederation? If to these interrogations there can be none other than a negative response, I repeat, why should there exist in the United States a political Anti-slavery party, if it does not propose some change or modification of the existing institution of slavery, or involve some denial of the rights of the Slave States? Republican partisan leaders would answer, that their organisation was established to resist the aggressions of slavery.' I must confess that I find it impossible to conceive what particular acts are here referred to, for, of all the institutions which exist, that of slavery is the least aggressive. When, however, the heated partisan is obliged to furnish an illustration of the nature of these aggressions, he refers usually to the unfortunate collision in the Senate Chamber between a Southern Representative and a Northern Senator. This Senator was attacked and beaten by a Southerner. It is not necessary to discuss the merits of that affair. The act was that of one man; but if

เ

the deed was as atrocious as it has been represented, by what harsh epithet may we denounce the crime of John Brown? What is there about Sumner that should excite to a greater degree our feelings of pity or compassion, than the helpless victims of John Brown's brutal propensities for murder? Sumner still lives to utter calumnies which ought to be sufficient to gratify the most morbid appetites of his followers. The victims of John Brown and his confederates are in their graves. Yet, strange and startling truth, the very men and women, who, if their power of performance had been in accordance with the force of their will would have immolated the whole South, to have avenged the 'crime' against Sumner, find but little to condemn in the conduct of that monster murderer, Brown, except his indiscretion! His 'zeal,' they say, 'was without prudence, but his motives were pure and honest!'

Nothing has occurred within a quarter of a century more significant of the unhappy state of feelings existing in the Northern States against the South, than the effects which the two events referred to have produced in the public mind. And I may add that it furnishes a fair index to the influences which Abolition propagandism has produced upon the morals of its adherents.

I have only referred to this subject to show that the chief aggressions complained of by the Aboli

T

tionists, even admitting the propriety of classing the cases referred to in that category, have been exceeded a thousandfold in enormity by aggressions upon the South. At most, they are not of sufficient magnitude to authorise or justify conservative men in giving their support and influence to a party, which can only accomplish its openly avowed designs by a palpable repudiation of the Constitution by which the Union is maintained, and which can only accomplish its measures by the sword. If there are citizens who are in favour of preserving the present Union, but still propose to give their support to the Republican candidates, may I ask them how they can reconcile the two? They cannot accomplish the political object they may propose under the present Constitution, then why should they give expression and form to such abstract desire? Is it to gratify or to give expression to a feeling of hatred against slavery? Let them not delude themselves. Men do not hate vice, but the vicious. They do not hate murder, but the murderer. Neither do men hate slavery, but the slave-holder. Vice, murder, slavery are mere words which convey to the mind the idea of certain acts, which acts must be performed or brought about by intelligent human beings, otherwise no passion of hatred could be excited. Now let me ask the sincere friend of the Union, how he supposes the Union can be maintained, or how he can think that the

Union ought to be maintained, when he and others constituting a majority of all the States of one section, being a majority of the citizens of the Confederacy, declare thus solemnly and formally that they have given their support to the candidate of their choice, with the sole object of giving expression to their feelings of hatred against the citizens of fifteen States of the Confederacy? Can a love of the Union, as it now exists, animate those who cultivate and give expression to such feelings in regard to one entire section of the Confederacy? Or can they expect to excite a feeling of love for any Union whatever, in the breasts of those against whom such an irritating warfare is kept up, on account of the existence of a domestic institution, for the creation of which they are not responsible, the continuation of which has become an inexorable necessity, and the management of which is, and of right ought to be, under their exclusive control?

LETTER XV.

Duty of Citizens-Republican Measures are the results of unfriendly feeling; not the cause-Spirit of the Republican Party inconsistent with a desire to maintain the Union in its integrity.

MAN cannot engage in any work which yields a greater revenue of good than in softening the asperities of his fellow-men against each other. In the present contest in the United States, it is the duty of every good citizen to pause and look steadily and calmly into the probable future of such a struggle. Let him not deceive himself by delusive hopes, but watch the current of passing events, and see with his own eyes in what direction we are tending. Let him pause and listen to the roar of that cataract whose ominous mutterings can now be distinctly heard, even upon the far-away shores of the Bosphorus, from whence I venture to send forth upon their uncertain errand these words of admonition.

It should be borne in mind that there is a feature peculiar to the present attitude of parties in the United States which distinguishes it from all others that have hitherto existed. In the past, parties have been organised in support of and in opposition to