Newspaper articles, etc. of the Day

[unionblue]

"Thirty years ago they rubbed out part of the line, and said [to the Slave Trader], "You may go into the lands of the South, but not into the lands of the North." This was the Missouris Compromise. Five years ago they rubbed out the rest of the line, and said to him, "We leave it to the Settlers to decide whether you shall come in or not." This was the Nebraska Bill. Now they turn humbly to him, hat in hand, and say, "Go where you please, the land is all yours, the National flag shall protect you, and the National Troops shoot down whoever resists you." This is the Dred Scott decision."

Pennsylvania newspaper, 1859.

Unionblue

[thea_447]

....."There is a feud between the North and the South which may be smothered but never overcome. They are at issue upon principles as dear and lasting as life itself. Reason as we may, or humbug as we choose, there is no denying the fact that the institutions of the South are the cause of this sectional controversy, and never unil these instituions are destroyed, or there is an end to the opposition of the North to their existence, can there be any lasting and genuine settlement between the parties. We may purchase, as we have done in this instance [the Compromise of 1850], a temporary exemption from wrong...but there is no peace...." --Columbus (Ga.) Sentinel, Jan. 23, 1851

[unionblue]

"Policy, humanity, and Christianity, alike forbid the extension of the evils of free society to new people and coming generations."

Richmond Enquirer, Jan. 22, 1856.

Unionblue

[thea_447]

After Lincoln's election emotions pushed reason aside and conservative men stood helpless while a comparatively small group of extremists shaped events. They did plead for caution and delay but as the New Orleans Bee put it: "Moderate men--good men--men who have heretofore clung steadfastly to the Union, believed in its perpetuity, and discountenanced even a thought of dissolution, are now forced painfully, reluctantly, with sorrow and anguish, to the conclusion that it is wholly impossible...to tolerate tamely the present, or indulge the slightest hope of an improvement in the future."

As the editor said: "The secession movement which [now] sprung up in Louisiana...grew too fast...to warrant the faintest hope of retarding its progress....All that could be done by moderate, dispassionate, political and experienced men was to go with the current, endeavoring to subdue its boiling and seething energies..."
(Civil War in the Making, 1815-1860,Avery Craven, Louisiana State University Press, 1959)

[ole]

Great post, Thea. Thanks

[unionblue]

"The most inveterate and sanguine Unionist in Georgia, if he is an observant man, must read, in the signs of the times, the hopelessness of the Union cause, and the feebleness of the Union sentiment in this State. The differences between North and South have been growing more marked for years, and the mutual repulsion more radical, until not a single sympathy is left between the dominant influences in each section. Not even the banner of the stars and stripes excites the same thrill of patriotic emotion, alike in the heart of the northern Republican and the southern Secessionist. The former looks upon that flag as blurred by the stain of African slavery, for which he feels responsible as long as that flag waves over it, and that it is his duty to humanity and religion to obliterate the stigma. The latter looks upon it as the emblem of a gigantic power, soon to pass into the hands of that sworn enemy, and knows that African slavery, though papoplied by the Federal Constitution, is doomed to a war of extermination. All the powers of a Government which has so long sheltered it will be turned to its destruction. The only hope for its preservation, therefore, is out of the Union. A few more years of unquiet peace may be spared to it, because Black Republicans cannot yet get full possession of every department of the Government. But this affords to the South no reason for a moment's delay in seeking new guards for its future safety."

The Augusta, Georgia, Daily Constitutionalist, November 16, 1860.

Unionblue

[ole]

Neil, your post included the following statement...
'The only hope for its preservation, therefore, is out of the Union. A few more years of unquiet peace may be spared to it, because Black Republicans cannot yet get full possession of every department of the Government. But this affords to the South no reason for a moment's delay in seeking new guards for its future safety."

An editorial, to be sure, and questionably representative, but it goes a long way in explaining why the slaveocracy didn't believe Lincoln when he said he had no constitutional power to eliminate slavery.

Thanks, Ole.

[unionblue]

The following are advertisements from the Baltimore Sun:

3d March, 1862,
25 dollars reward. Ran away, March 2d, from the farm of Mrs. S.B. Mayo, in Anne Arundel county, negro boy, John Stewart. He is 19 or 20 years of age; 5 feet 9 or 10 inches high; very prominent mouth and large front teeth; light complexion; has a stupid look when spoken to; his father lives in Annapolis. Any one who will arrest and secure him in jail can receive the above reward.
T.H. Gaither, Howard Co.

13th March, 1862,
200 dollars reward. Ran away from the subscriber, living in the upper part of Calvert county, in September last, my negro man Thomas, who calls himself Thomas Jones. He is about 5 feet 6 to 9 inches high; dark chestnut colour; stout and well built; very likely; large white teeth; with full suit of hair (plaited when he left home); the whites of his eyes show very much when spoken to; had on white fuiled cloth peajacket, dark cloth pantaloons, and cloth cap. I have no doubt that he is in or about Washington or Bladensburgh, as he left a day or two before Colonel Cowdin's regiment left; or, if in Baltimore, he is with the Jones' or Kayes', his free relatives. I will give the above reward, if taken out of the State of Maryland or the district of Columbia; one hundred dollars if taken in the district of Columbia, or any county of the State except Calvert; and fifty dollars if taken in Calvert county. In either case, to be delivered to me or secured in jail, so that I get him again.
Jonathan Y. Barber, Friendship A.A. Co.

20th March, 1862,
180 dollars reward. Ran away from the subscriber, near Bladensburgh, boy Anthony, commonly called 'Toney.' He is 5 feet 5 inches high; very black; short hair, grum countenance when spoken to; with a small scar over one of his eyes. Went away with a black jacket and United States' buttons on it, casinct pants, and yellow gauntlet gloves. I will give 180 dollars to any one who will bring him home to me.
Fielder Magruder.

15 March, 1862,
Ran away from the subscriber, 13th March, negro woman, Ellen, aged about forty years, and her boy Joe, aged seven years. They are both yellow colour. Ellen has a defect in one eye; Joe is bright yellow. I will pay a liberal reward for their arrest.
Joshua M. Bosley.

The following are advertisements from a local Tennessee newspaper.

Committed to jail of Davidson county, 21st April, 1862, a negro woman, who says her name is Lucinda, and belongs to William Donalson, of Davidson county. The said woman is about 28 or 30 years old, dark copper colour. The owner is requested to come forward and prove property, and pay charges as the law directs.
James M. Hinto, Sheriff and Jailor, D.C.

Committed to jail of Davidson county, 4th April, 1862, a negro man, who says his name is Joe Bartlett: said boy claims to be a free man of colour; about 24 years old; says he lives in Henry county, Kentucky; light copper colour, scar on the right side of neck; weighs about 175 or 180 lbs.; 6 feet 1 inch high.
J.M. Hinton, Sheriff and Jailor, D.C.

The number of like advertisements in this one local paper numbered around thirty more 'commitments' to jail.

Unionblue

[ole]

Late 1861, the editor of the "Louisville Courier" wrote:

"We are not the brothers of the Yankees, and the slavery question is merely the pretext, not the cause of the war. The true irrepressible conflict lies fundamentally in the hereditary hostility, the sacred animosity, the eternal antagonism between the two races engaged. The Norman cavalier can not brook the vulgar familiarity of the Saxon Yankee, while the latter is continuously devising some plan to bring down his aristocratic neighbor to his own detested level. Thus was the contest waged in the old United States… [and] when the Yankee hirelings placed one of their own spawn [Lincoln] over us, political connection became unendurable, and separation necessary to preserve our self-respect. As our Norman kinsmen in England, always a minority, have ruled their Saxon countrymen in political vassalage up to the present day, so have we, ‘the slave oligarchs,’ governed the Yankees till within a twelvemonth. We framed the Constitution, for seventy years moulded the policy of the government, and placed our own men, or ‘Northern men with Southern principles’ in power. On the 6th of November, 1860, the Puritans emancipated themselves, and are now in violent insurrection against their former overseers. This insane holiday freak will not last long, however, for, dastards in fight, and incapable of self-government, they will inevitably again fall under the control of the superior race. A few … thrashings will bring them once more under the yoke as docile as the most loyal of our Ethiopian Chattels.”

[ole]

By now, I'd have expected some reaction to that editorial. Of course, it's just an editorial, but it is fraught with meaning. From our present viewpoint, it's outragous. But it does express a viewpoint -- the northerners were vassals in rebellion against their southern masters. Does anyone else find these words somewhat provactive?

There's also some support for postings in this forum in that the south controlled and molded the government, since its inception, until the rebellious election of the spawn.

Where is the debate?

Ole