The Women of the ConfederacyUnderwood, J. L. (John Levi)
History
The Women of the Confederacy
Underwood, J. L. (John Levi)
United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865 -- Anecdotes; Women -- Confederate States of America
It may not be amiss, however, to call attention to the fact that the
North already admits that the people of the South were honest in
their contentions, and that they at least thought they were right.
Furthermore, it is even conceded that the South was not without great
support for its contentions from legal, moral and historical points of
view. For instance, Professor Goldwin, of Canada, an Englishman, a
distinguished historian, resident of and sympathizing with the North
during the civil war, recently said:
Few who have looked into the history can doubt that the Union
originally was, and was generally taken by the parties to it to
be, a compact; dissoluble, perhaps most of them would have said,
at pleasure, dissoluble certainly on breach of the articles of
Union.
To the same effect, but in even stronger terms, are the words of Mr.
Henry Cabot Lodge, now a Senator from Massachusetts, who said in one
of his historic works:
When the Constitution was adopted by the votes of States at
Philadelphia, and accepted by the votes of States in popular
conventions, it is safe to say that there was not a man in the
country from Washington and Hamilton on the one side to George
Clinton and George Mason on the other, who regarded the new system
as anything but an experiment entered upon by the States and from
which each and every State had the right peaceably to withdraw, a
right which was very likely to be exercised.
As far back as 1887, General Thomas C. Ewing, of Ohio, said in a
speech in New York:
The North craves a living and lasting peace with the South; it
also asks no humiliating conditions; it recognizes the fact that
the proximate cause of the war was the constitutional question of
the right of secession--a question which, until it was settled by
the war, had neither a right side nor a wrong side to it. Our
forefathers in framing the Constitution purposely left the
question unsettled; to have settled it distinctly in the
Constitution would have been to prevent the formation of the Union
of the thirteen States. They, therefore, committed that question
to the future, and the war came on and settled it forever. And,
right here, let me say that the South has accepted that settlement
in good faith, and will forever abide by it as loyally as the
North, although we will never admit that our people were wrong in
making the contest.
This question was calmly and logically discussed by Mr. Charles
Francis Adams in a late speech delivered in Charleston, S. C., when he
said:
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