CHAPTER XVI.

As the Southern States have given infallible proofs of their recognition of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, however doubtfully adopted, and of the consequent indissolubility of the Union by any separate act of State interposition, and of the equality of the rights and privileges of every citizen, the magnanimity which they have exhibited needs to be imitated. Reconstruction, as a personal and State obligation, should not be confined to territory south of Mason and Dixon's line. Loyalty and patriotism are inward, and come not from coercion, distrust, or multiplication of tests and oaths. What the South has said and done should be accepted generously and confidingly. In 1868, either Seymour or Grant received all their electoral votes. In 1872, Greeley had their partial support, and his endorsement by Southern men was the strongest possible proof that universal freedom was an unalterable fact, and that slavery of the African was no longer an issue in political contests. In this contest, General Grant received six of the nine seceding States whose votes were counted. Such Northern men as Tilden, Han

cock, and Cleveland have been sustained with. enthusiasm, and no persons could be, in mind and heart, more thoroughly Union and antislavery than they. Our foreign relations have, in some instances, been committed to Southern hands, and no one has suspected that our interests and honor and flag were not in them perfectly secure. In internal legislation, while consistently adhering to their old principles of strict construction, States rights, economy of expenditure, low taxes, there has been no whisper of a covert purpose on the part of the South to weaken the Government, discredit its character, or impair its prosperity. If, unfortu nately, a foreign war should occur, no one doubts the enthusiasm or courage or patriotism of the South in sacrifices or conflicts.

The action and utterances of the press and of public men at the South, in sustaining the wise and successful effort of President Cleveland to maintain the authority of the Federal Government and execute Federal laws in Chicago, are in strict accordance with the reconstructed sentiment, and ought to silence the gibes about disloyalty and the "rebel brigadiers." The spirit of nationality and of devotion to the Union is as strong in Georgia as in Massachusetts; stronger than in many States where a hyphened citizenship is the dominant factor in elections. It is, however, singular that Southern support of the Constitution and of regular Government should be adduced as inconsistent with the contention

of the seceding States. It is stupidity to assimilate the action of those States to the lawlessness of rioters and anarchists. It shows a perverse unwillingness or incapacity to understand the character of our complex federative system when it is argued that sustaining the President in the protection of property and lives against the crimes and madness of the lawless is an abandonment of the true States-Rights theory. Secession was the enthronement of law, the interposition of political sovereignty between the people and illegal usurpation. It was not mobocracy nor anarchy, but the appeal to LAW, in its highest and most authoritative expression. There is not the remotest analogy, but irreconcilable opposition, between the claims of a mob and the deliberate action of a State, invoking its sovereignty.

It is often coolly, somewhat pharisaically, assumed that emancipation of slaves in the North was the result of respect for the laws of God and the rights of man, and that the war was a protest of sensitive and enlightened consciences against the barbarism of slavery. The altruistic teachings of Christianity are often exaggerated as to their influence in the abolition of class-distinctions. History shows that progress has not been due to intellectual and religious forces only, but that economic forces which have been at work in society have been the most controlling of all. Unquestionably, religion in human evolution has been potential in inducing

the sacrifice of individual interests to the general good, but it is a common post hoc propter hoc delusion to attribute to conscience and morals what grew out of economics, or political or military causes. The abolition of slavery at the end of the fourteenth century was brought about "almost wholly by economic causes, and apparently the teachings of Christianity had no share in it." So the logic of events, the unprofitableness of slave labor, the exigencies of war, had much to do with freeing the slaves in the Northern States and with President Lincoln's proclamation. It is almost certain that the border States would have gradually and peaceably manumitted their slaves, if they had been left to the natural course of human events, and to the exercise of their own independent autonomy. In 1830 the Virginian Convention came within a few votes of adopting prospective emancipation. Kentucky, at a later day, had a strong political and religious movement, looking to the same end. Many statesmen, and leaders of thought, and quiet men and women deplored the existence of slavery, and perplexed their intellects and consciences to devise feasible methods of release from what seemed to them an increasing evil and danger. These wise and conservative men and women were silenced by the growing and perverted proslavery sentiment which had been created by selfish interests on the one hand, and the fierce assaults of

1 Yale Review, May, 1894, pp. 101-103.

the abolitionists on the other. The war abolished slavery summarily. The South, being no longer interested pecuniarily or politically in its extension or continuance, was in a condition to consider the whole question without the bias of prejudice or of interest. As the result of this calm survey, every thoughtful, rational person in the South not only acquiesces but rejoices in the cessation of the system. As to the suffrage imposed upon the negro, his general eligibility to office, his fitness for such responsibilities of citizenship, and the persistent attempts to subordinate States, cities, and communities to his domination, the opinion and sentiment of the white people of the South are solid and unchangeable. As to the freedom of the negro, his right to choice of, and compensation for, his work, his capacity for improvement, there is little difference of opinion. In her sacrifices and continuous efforts to lift up the race, the South has acted with conspicuous magnanimity and generosity. The law makes no distinction between races as to personal and property rights. Public schools have been established and sustained in every State; every child, white and black, has access, for a portion of the year, to free education.

It should be borne in mind that the burden of this gratuitous instruction has fallen, and for a long time must continue to fall, disproportionately on the white citizens, who pay ninetyfive per cent. of the taxes. The negro improves