South to give up one thousand millions of property, which she holds by a title satisfactory to herself, as the first step. Then estimate the cost of an adequate outfit for the self-support of the emancipated millions; then reflect on the derangement of the entire industrial system of the South, and all the branches of commerce and manufactures that depend on its great staples; then the necessity of conferring equal political privileges on the emancipated race, who, being free, would be content with nothing less, if anything less were consistent with our political system; then the consequent organization of two great political parties on the basis of colour, and the eternal feud which would rage between them; and finally the overflow into the free States of a vast multitude of needy and helpless emigrants, who, being excluded from many of them (and among others from Kansas), would prove doubly burdensome where they are admitted. Should we, sir, with all our sympathy for the coloured race (and I do sincerely sympathize with them, and to all whom chance throws in my way, I have through life extended all the relief and assistance in my power), give a very cordial reception to two or three hundred thousand destitute emancipated slaves? Does not every candid man see, that

every one of these steps presents difficulties of the most formidable character, difficulties for which, as far as I know, no man and no party has proposed a solution?"

The preceding is from the speech of Mr. Everett, at the great Union meeting, held at Boston, on the 8th of December, 1859, in support of the Union, and to protest against the sentiments of the sympathizers with the recent insurrection in Virginia. One resolution stated

"We regret that the main body of our citizens, too much through the neglect of their political duties, have been often falsely exhibited in the eyes of the nation by those whose councils and conduct do not command the general approbation."

When we consider statements such as these, by such men as Dr. Channing and the Hon. Edward Everett, and review the history of the slavery question, it will be seen that those who have set themselves forward as the friends of the negro are by no means so harmless and discreet, nor the other party so utterly wicked and unreasonable, as numbers in Europe seem inclined to suppose. As foreigners, we must naturally incline to be cautious in our judgments on a question involved in so many difficulties

P

and peculiarities, which it is not easy for us to appreciate. To our ancestors the fastening of this great evil upon the United States is due; we have only recently wiped out the stain from our own soil, and for us to do so was a comparatively light and easy matter; while, by our recent commercial policy, we have given no small encouragement to slavery. The Southern States, whether in a separate confederacy or in the Union, are in anything but an enviable situation, and, without abating our desire to see slavery come to an end, or at all approving of the conduct of the planters, some allowance and consideration for the difficulties and perilous position which they have inherited might be not altogether out of place.

The question of secession, now of such deep interest, does not appear to have been provided for by the Constitution, unless indirectly, in Article V., which treats of amendments to the Constitution. This article enacts that amendments must be proposed by two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, or by a convention of the people on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several States; and that such amendments must be ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the States, or by conventions

in three-fourths of the States, according as Congress may determine on one or other mode of ratification.

If these conditions are not fulfilled, there seems no other way in which secession cần be constitutionally sanctioned; and, legally, Congress and the President are justified in the course which seems to have been resolved on by Mr. Lincoln, to ignore any act of secession not effected in the mode appointed by the Constitution, and to collect the duties and retake and hold the Federal forts in the seceding States, as if they had not seceded. Every one will sympathize with the new President and the Republican party in their desire to do all in their power to preserve the Union, which stands so great before the world, and has had so glorious a career. But the questions arise, can it be preserved by force? Are not the separate interests and feelings of resentment of the Southern States so powerful that there can be no real or beneficial union with the Northern States? Are they not so great and so determined that only a long, bloody civil war could subdue them, that result being even then doubtful? Do not the large legislative and governing powers possessed by the several States-Sovereign States, as they are termed

-and their different commercial and other interests, sanction in reason, though they may not in the strict letter of the law, their withdrawal from a union when it ceases to be a benefit to them?

Granting the general inadmissibility of a right of secession, are there not, in this instance, features quite peculiar, which set aside general rules? Is this a case for the rigid enforcement of the law, or one of those emergencies that rise above law, and demand an equitable adjustment solely upon their intrinsic merits? Mr. Lincoln is said to have taken for his model the conduct of General Jackson in 1832-3, when he declared his fixed resolution to employ force to collect in South Carolina the heavy protective duties imposed to favour the Northern manufacturers, and which she endeavoured to resist or nullify, as injurious to her interests. It is true that South Carolina deferred her resistance, and the determined front shown by the President seemed to prevail; but the nullifying State only delayed, in hopes of support from the other Southern States, or of relief by Congress from the duties complained of. By a compromise measure, devised mainly by the distinguished statesman Henry Clay, Congress did yield what satisfied