The Continental Monthly, Vol. 5, No. 3, March, 1864: Devoted to Literature and National PolicyVarious
History
The Continental Monthly, Vol. 5, No. 3, March, 1864: Devoted to Literature and National Policy
Various
Literature, Modern -- 19th century -- Periodicals; United States -- Politics and government -- 19th century -- Periodicals
'It was never intended to interfere with States that were loyal.
This Proclamation comes up as a great feature in this war. In my
judgment the Proclamation was the right thing in the right place,
and without it I am just as sure as I am of my own existence that
we could not have made the progress we have made. And I hold that
the man who denounces the Proclamation either speaks ignorantly,
speaks about that of which he knows little or nothing, or else he
really desires that the rebellion should succeed.
'There are two classes of States in the South; there is the class
of States that is affected by the Proclamation, and a class of
States that is not. With this last class of States, which is not
affected by the Proclamation, we have simply nothing to do, except
to bid God speed to the unconditional Union men of those States,
that they will do their own work in their own way and in their own
time, and all we have to do is to stand by them.
'But in the States which are affected by the Proclamation the case
is different. Either the Proclamation was a great, monstrous sham,
and an imposition in the face of the world, or else that
Proclamation was an effectual thing, and there are no slaves to-day
in the rebel States. They are all enfranchised by the Proclamation,
for what says it? All the slaves of these States are declared now
and forever free, and the executive power is pledged to the
maintenance of their freedom. If it were not so it would be a
national imposture, and I would no more be guilty of that piece of
infamy than I would steal into your house at night and rob your
pantry. But what have we to do with this Proclamation in the
rebellious Slave States? It is a very simple thing: _just simply
recognise the Union men who remain in those States_. Such men as
Mr. Flanders, and Mr. May, and a whole host of others, who were
known as slaveowners, are now satisfied that the Union men of the
South must see to it that slavery must never be permitted to be
reestablished in those States. Take such a man as the Hon. Charles
Anderson. When he went home and stood up for the Union, what did
the slave aristocracy do for him? They drove him from the State,
and his wife and little ones were obliged to take shelter in the
bush. And so with multitudes of Union men in Texas at the present
day. But all of them wish to get back and establish a Free State in
Texas; because, they say, no other than a Free State can ever
protect them from the enemies of human freedom, and, I was going to
say, of human nature. Again, in Florida there were many who were
driven away who are now anxious to return. Is there a man here who
wants these noble, generous Union men of the South _to go back to
be trampled under foot by restored rebels_! Let them go back, but
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