Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

mouths of the Mississippi by all friendly States CHAP. XII. and powers." The other was that one of her Federal Representatives, John E. Bouligny, remained true to his oath and his loyalty, and continued to hold his seat in Congress to the end of his term the solitary instance from the Cotton States.1

It is a significant feature in the secession proceedings of the six Cotton States which first took action, that their conventions in every case neglected or refused to submit their ordinances of secession to a vote of the people for ratification or rejection. The whole spirit and all the phenomena of the movement forbade their doing so. From first to last the movement was forced, not spontaneous, official, not popular; and its leaders could not risk the period of doubt which a submission of the ordinances would involve, much less their rejection at the polls. To this general rule Texas, the seventh seceding State, formed an exception. Governor Houston opposed secession, and as long as possible thwarted the conspirators' plans. By a bolder usurpation than elsewhere, they nevertheless assembled an independent and entirely illegal convention, passed an ordinance of secession, February 1, and held an election to ratify or reject it, February 23. Long before this they had in

1 Another instance of unswerving Louisiana loyalty is worth recording. James G. Taliaferro, delegate from the parish of Catahoula, though a Virginian by birth and a slaveholder, presented to the convention a vigorous protest against the ordinance of secession (which, however, it would not enter on its journal), and not

VOL. III.-13

only refused to sign the ordi-
nance, but refused his allegiance
to the Confederate States. After
the war he became president of
the Constitutional Convention,
which, under the Reconstruction
Acts, restored Louisiana to the
Union, and was, when he died in
1876, a Judge of the Supreme
Court of the State.

1861.

CHAP. XII. substance joined the State to the rebel Confederacy, and the popular vote showed a nominal majority for secession, though the partial returns, and the voting amid a local revolution, afforded no trustworthy indication of popular sentiment.

CHAPTER XIII

THE MONTGOMERY CONFEDERACY

FOLLOWING

LLOWING the successive ordinances of se- CHAP. XIII. cession passed by the Cotton States, their delegations withdrew one by one from Congress. In this final step their Senators and Representatives adopted no concerted method, but went according to individual convenience or caprice; some making the briefest announcement of their withdrawal, others delivering addresses of considerable length. These parting declarations contain nothing of historical interest. They are a mere repetition of what they had said many times in debate: complaints of Northern aggression and allegations of Northern hostility; they failed to make any statement or acknowledgment of aggressions and hostility on the part of the South against the North. The ceremony of withdrawal, therefore, was formal and perfunctory; pre-announced and recognized as a foregone conclusion, it attracted little attention from Congress and the public. Only two cases were exceptional — that of Mr. Bouligny, the Representative from Louisiana, who, as already mentioned, remained loyal to the Union and retained his seat in the House; and that of Senator Wigfall, of Texas, who, radically and outspokenly

[ocr errors]

CHAP. XIII. disloyal, yet kept his seat in the Senate, not only through the remainder of Mr. Buchanan's term, but even during the special session, assembled according to custom, to confirm the nominations made by the new President immediately after his inauguration.

One of the remarkable coincidences of the secession conspiracy is, that on the same day which witnessed the meeting of a Peace Convention in Washington, to deceive and confuse the public opinion of the North with discussion of an impossible compromise, the delegates of the seceded States convened at Montgomery, Alabama, to consolidate rebellion and prepare for armed resistance. It is not impossible that this was a piece of strategy, purposely designed by the secession leaders; for the Washington peace conference, despite its constant avowals of a desire to promote union, was originated and managed by the little clique of Virginia conspirators whose every act, if not preconceived, at least resulted in treasonable duplicity.

The secession conventions of the Cotton States had appointed delegates equal in number to their former Senators and Representatives in Congress. These met in Montgomery, Alabama, on the 4th day of February, 1861, to form a Southern Confederacy. The Washington caucus, it will be remembered, suggested the 15th of the month. But such had been the success, or, rather, the want of opposition to the movement, that it was probably considered advisable to hasten the programme, and instead of only having preliminary secession complete by the 4th of March, to finish the whole structure of an

« ZurückWeiter »