Foot-prints of a letter carrier; or, a history of the world's correspondeceRees, James
History
Foot-prints of a letter carrier; or, a history of the world's correspondece
Rees, James
Postal service -- History; Postal service -- United States -- History
While the fanatical portion of the Northern abolitionists were striving
to impress upon the South the enormity of their crime in sustaining
slavery, the South was equally virulent in its condemnation of their
mode of doing so. Meetings were held all over the country, speeches
made, and passion swayed the judgment to the total extinction of common
sense. The South accused the North of encouraging amalgamation; the
North indignantly denied it, and with much logic proved that it was a
_Southern virtue altogether_.
This was the beginning of the rebellion: here were the seeds grown,
watered, and nurtured by hatred, envy, and malice. The South had planted
its poisonous root on a free soil, and it came in contact with its more
wholesome brother: the one began to pale before the venom of the other,
blasting it like “a mildew’d ear.” It is not our purpose to give a
history of these eventful years, nor the consequence attending the
operations of the Northern opposition party to slavery against Southern
arrogance and presumptuous domination. The question, however, had to be
decided at one time or another; and in 1860 it was answered by the
thunder sound of cannon and flashes from millions of rifles.
The South became very indignant against the post-office department,
which it accused of an abuse of power, by _permitting_ what they called
“incendiary publications” to pass through the office to individuals in
the South. The Federal Government was called upon to correct this
“prostitution of its laws,” which was calculated to affect its (the
South’s) peculiar “domestic institution,” and if persisted in would be
the CERTAIN DESTRUCTION OF THE UNION.
In answer to repeated complaints made to Amos Kendall, Esq., the then
postmaster-general, both from Southern men and Northern advocates of
slavery, he stated distinctly that he had no legal authority to exclude
newspapers from the mail, nor prohibit their carriage or delivery on
account of their character and tendency, real or supposed. Indeed, this
would be assuming a power over the liberty of the press which might be
perverted and abused to an extent highly injurious to our republican
system of government.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account