THE SECTIONAL CONTROVERSY. CHAPTER I. ORIGINAL SECTIONAL DIVERSITIES. BEFORE the American Revolution, there were on the great eastern slope of North America, along the shores of the Atlantic Ocean, thirteen separate colonies. These colonies were, indeed, connected with England, as their mother country; but in their relations to each other they were independent and sovereign nations. Moreover, they were, to some extent, alien to one another in race, in religion, and in political affinities. The inhabitants of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, were descended from that class of the English who were Puritan in their religion, and Roundhead in their politics. The inhabitants of New York and New Jersey were largely descendants of the Dutch. The English Quakers, the original settlers, gave a certain character to Pennsylvania, just as the Roman Catholics did to Maryland, just as the prelatical cavaliers did to Virginia, just as did the French Huguenots to South Carolina. ADDITIONAL SECTIONAL DIVERSITIES. But other diversities were, in process of time, created by climate, education, industrial pursuits, social institutions, and government. The people of New Hampshire, New Jersey, Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia, were under what was called a Provincial Government, in which the Governors were appointed by the Crown. The people of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, were under what was called a Proprietary Government, in which the Governors were appointed by certain individuals called proprietaries. Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, were under what was called a Charter Government, in which the Governor was appointed by the freemen of the colony. In Massachusetts, after 1692, the Governors were appointed by the Crown. Nor were the existing diversities diminished by personal intercourse between the colonies, or by the press. In those times there were but few travelling, whether for the purposes of business or pleasure; and the press had but a limited circulation for the few newspapers which it sent forth. So great were these diversities, that in Rivington's Gazette, p. 32, they are thus noticed: "Nothing has surprised people more than the Virginians and Marylanders joining with so much warmth with the New England Republicans in their opposition to their ancient Constitution, which has been the glory of the English in every part of the world. As there are certainly no nations under heaven more opposite than these colonies, it would be very difficult to account for it on the principle of religion and sound policy, had not the Virginians discovered their indifference to both, so highly revered by their illustrious ancestors." BOND OF SYMPATHY BETWEEN THE COLONIES. But it was also true that the colonies, generally, were of common blood, and spoke a common language, and were familiar with the same traditions, and, in relation to Great Britain, had common rights and interests at stake, and common habits of reasoning about them. It is not surprising, therefore, that when the crown encroached on the rights of Massachusetts, that all the colonies should express the liveliest interest in her sufferings. Her fate might soon be theirs. It is not surprising that Virginia should take the lead in the declaration, that the interests of all the colonies were concerned in what was done by the British Government, in respect to Massachusetts. The Assembly of Virginia warned the king of the danger that would ensue, "if any person in any part of America should be seized and carried beyond sea for trial," May 16, 1769. says: Of the resolves passed by Virginia at this time, Bancroft "Is it asked who was the adviser of the measure? None can tell. Great things were done, tranquilly and modestly, without a thought of the glory that was their due. Had the Ancient Dominion been silent, I will not say that Massachusetts might have faltered; but mutual confidence would have been wanting. American freedom was more prepared by courageous counsel for successful war." His. Am. Rev., vol. iii., p. 310. In another place he says: "The Boston committee were already (1774) in close correspondence with the other New England colonies, with New York, and Pennsylvania. Old jealousies were removed, and perfect harmony subsisted between all. "UNION" was the cry, a union which should reach from Florida to the icy plains of Canada;" p. 541. Under a common impulse, in view of common interests at stake, all the colonies, except Georgia, sent delegates to the first CONTINENTAL CONGRESS, which assembled at Philadelphia on the 5th of September, 1774. It is not surprising that PATRICK HENRY should, in that Congress, scout the idea of sectional distinctions and of individual interests. "All America," said he, "is thrown into one mass. Where are your landmarks, your boundaries of colonies? They are all thrown down. The distinction between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers, and New Englanders are no more. I am not a Virginian, but an American." Under a common impulse all the States sent delegates to the second Continental Congress, which assembled at Philadelphia on the 10th of May, 1775, which unanimously appointed George Washington commander-in-chief of the continental forces in the united colonies. Under a common impulse, all the colonies, on the 4th of July, 1776, voted, through their delegates, "that the united colonies ought to be Free and Independent States." Under the same common impulse, the States, eleven of them, adopted the articles of confederation in 1778, one in 1779, and the remaining one in 1781, by which the union of the States was consummated. |