Opening the text

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860Blaine, James Gillespie

History

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860

Name: Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860
Author: Blaine, James Gillespie

Blaine, James Gillespie

United States -- History; United States -- History -- 1865-1898

It seemed impossible for Mr. Benjamin or for any other leader of
Southern opinion to argue the question of State rights fairly or
dispassionately.  They had been so persistently trained in the
heresy that they could give no weight to the conclusive reasoning
of the other side.  The original thirteen, they averred, were "free,
sovereign, and independent States," acknowledged to be such by the
King of Great Britain in the Treaty of peace in 1783.  The new
States, so the argument ran, were all admitted to the Union of
terms of equality with the old.  Hence all were alike endowed with
sovereignty.  Even the historical part of this argument was strained
and fallacious.  Much was made in the South of Mr. Toombs's
declaration that "the original thirteen" were as "independent of
each other as Australia and Jamaica."  So indeed they were as long
as they remained British Colonies.  Their only connection in that
condition was in their common dependence on the Crown.  But the
first step towards independence of the Crown was to unite.  From
that day onward they were never separate.  Nor did the King of
Great Britain acknowledge the "independence and sovereignty" of
the thirteen individual and separate States.  The Treaty of peace
declares that "His Majesty acknowledges the said United States
[naming them] to be free, sovereign, and independent States."--not
separately and individually, but the "said _United_ States."  The
King then agrees that "the following are and shall be the boundaries
of the said United States,"--proceeding to give, not the boundaries
of each State, but the boundaries of the whole as one unit, one
sovereignty, one nationality.  Last of all, the commissioners who
signed the treaty with the King's commissioner were not acting for
the individual States, but for the _United_ States.  Three of them,
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay, were from the North,
and Henry Laurens from the South.  The separate sovereignties whose
existence was so persistently alleged by Mr. Benjamin and Mr. Toombs
were not represented when independence was conceded.  Mr. Benjamin's
conclusion, therefore, was not only illogical, but was completely
disproved by plain historical facts.

Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.

Opening the text

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860Blaine, James Gillespie

History

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860

Blaine, James Gillespie

United States -- History; United States -- History -- 1865-1898

It seemed impossible for Mr. Benjamin or for any other leader of
Southern opinion to argue the question of State rights fairly or
dispassionately.  They had been so persistently trained in the
heresy that they could give no weight to the conclusive reasoning
of the other side.  The original thirteen, they averred, were "free,
sovereign, and independent States," acknowledged to be such by the
King of Great Britain in the Treaty of peace in 1783.  The new
States, so the argument ran, were all admitted to the Union of
terms of equality with the old.  Hence all were alike endowed with
sovereignty.  Even the historical part of this argument was strained
and fallacious.  Much was made in the South of Mr. Toombs's
declaration that "the original thirteen" were as "independent of
each other as Australia and Jamaica."  So indeed they were as long
as they remained British Colonies.  Their only connection in that
condition was in their common dependence on the Crown.  But the
first step towards independence of the Crown was to unite.  From
that day onward they were never separate.  Nor did the King of
Great Britain acknowledge the "independence and sovereignty" of
the thirteen individual and separate States.  The Treaty of peace
declares that "His Majesty acknowledges the said United States
[naming them] to be free, sovereign, and independent States."--not
separately and individually, but the "said _United_ States."  The
King then agrees that "the following are and shall be the boundaries
of the said United States,"--proceeding to give, not the boundaries
of each State, but the boundaries of the whole as one unit, one
sovereignty, one nationality.  Last of all, the commissioners who
signed the treaty with the King's commissioner were not acting for
the individual States, but for the _United_ States.  Three of them,
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay, were from the North,
and Henry Laurens from the South.  The separate sovereignties whose
existence was so persistently alleged by Mr. Benjamin and Mr. Toombs
were not represented when independence was conceded.  Mr. Benjamin's
conclusion, therefore, was not only illogical, but was completely
disproved by plain historical facts.

Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860

Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. 1: From Lincoln to Garfield, with a Review of the Events Which Led to the Political Revolution of 1860

No reviews yet