previous next
[144] Union alone, and at an expense far greater than all the revenue received from her, directly or indirectly. Some of these she may, in defiance of gratitude and duty, seize, and in mercy be permitted to hold, but the disbursements for their further use must be hers. And these, in a short, a very short period, would make her a bankrupt. Already, if reports be true, is she sadly suffering. Can she much longer adhere to the reckless course which produces it? Will the wise, reflecting, loyal part of her people much longer submit to it? No. She will be with us again.

As Mr. Jefferson, on the 20th of October, 1820, when separation was then apprehended, wrote the late William Rush, “it (the separation) will be but for a short time--two or three years trial will bring them back like quarrelling lovers, to renewed embraces and increased affection.” Some of the sons of these States possibly look to a re-opening of the slave trade; some of them, we know, have often recommended it. Vain the hope! The horrid traffic is condemned by the judgment of the civilized world, and accursed of God. The feeling against it in England and France. is too strong to be disregarded by these Governments, if they were so disposed, as they certainly are not. They would not permit its revival by these few feeble States, and if persisted in by them, would prohibit and punish it, even by war.

Nor, unless the United States (for these would still remain) acknowledge their independence, would it be acknowledged by other nations. Their staples they could only ship in American or foreign vessels, sailing with the permission of the United States. Nor could they receive exports in any other mode. A more helpless isolation, or more degrading dependence, can hardly be conceived. It is impossible, therefore, but that these States will, sooner or later, be most happy to return, and be with us again. An early adjustment that will retain all the rest, and bind them even the closer together, would carry joy through the land.

Even Massachusetts, so much given of late to sentimental politics and mischievous philanthropy, will be glad to adjust on fair terms. Of this I feel satisfied. A reaction of opinion has evidently already begun there. And who is not desirous to retain Massachusetts? Who can, without pain, meditate her possible loss to the Union? The first blood in our first mighty conflict was shed on her soil, and the first blow there struck for and in the defence of the rights of all. In the Senate, and in the field, throughout that great period, her sons were among the foremost in stirring eloquence, cheerful sacrifices, and matchless daring. Their bones almost literally whitened the soil of every State, and the Stripes and Stars when in their hands were ever the certain pledge of victory or death. Who would surrender Concord, Lexington, Bunker Hill?

What American would give up the right to tread within the sacred precincts of Bunker Hill, and there to catch the patriotic Union spirit, which is the very genius of the place? She may have recently, no doubt she has, gone astray. But her error has been but the excess of her virtue. Her love of freedom has caused her to forget that, unless restrained, it soon runs into licentiousness. Her love of freedom has caused her to forget that with us, and as their fathers taught, and all history teaches, that our freedom can only be truly enjoyed and promoted by observing all the obligations of the Constitution.

And I doubt not that she sees the danger now, and is prepared to sanction any measure necessary and proper to arrest it and to make her in heart, as she is in interest and in duty, bound to observe in good faith all its engagements.

South Carolina, too. Who is willing to part with her? Her great names, during the same classic period, won for her and for all, an undying fame. Her Moultries, Pinckneys, Rutledges, Haynes, Marions, Lawrences, do not belong to her alone — they are as much ours as hers; as the fame of Washington is as much the property and pride of the world as of Virginia. She, too, is astray now, as she was once before. She now thinks herself out of the Union. But there is a common tie, however, for a moment imperceptible and inoperative, that still makes us hers, and hers ours. The tie of blood, of language, of religion, of love, of Constitutional freedom, of a common ancestry, who in battle and in council were ever a band of brothers — deliberating, fighting, dying, for our joint liberty and happiness.

Time, time, therefore, that great pacificator, can only be necessary to arouse all to duty — to unite us all — to bring us back to each other “to renewed embraces and increased affection.”

How is that time to be had? I think we should await awhile longer the action of Congress. The most experienced and wisest of its members are daily, hourly, laboring to restore our peace. Success, I believe, will reward their efforts. But this failing, there is still ground of hope. Let the Border States unite in council and announce to the extremes of either section what they think should be done, for their own protection and the general safety, and in no boasting or disparaging spirit, but with affection and firmness, recommend it as the ground on which they are resolved to stand.

I believe, yes, as firmly as I credit my own existence, that such a recommendation would be hailed everywhere with approval. That done the danger is over — peace restored — the Union, the glorious Union preserved, and all its countless blessings secured forever.

It cannot be that such a Union can be destroyed. It cannot be that it is not beyond the reach of folly or of crime.

If asked when I should be for a dissolution

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Places (automatically extracted)
hide People (automatically extracted)
Sort people alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a person to search for him/her in this document.
Thomas Jefferson (1)
T. J. Haynes (1)
hide Dates (automatically extracted)
Sort dates alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a date to search for it in this document.
October 20th, 1820 AD (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: