Daniel Webster had previously expressed the ame opinion.

"In March, 1850, when I found it my duty to address Congress on these important topics, it was my conscientious belief, and it still remains unshaken, that if the controversy with Texas could not be amicably adjusted, there must in all probability be civil war and bloodshed; and in contemplation of such a prospect, although we took it for granted that no opposition could arise to the authority of the United States that would not be suppressed, it appeared of little consequence on which standard victory should perch. But what of that? I was not anxious about military consequences; I looked to the civil and political state of things, and their results, and I inquired what would be the condition of the country if in this state of agitation, if in this vastly extended though not generally pervading feeling of the South, war should break out, and bloodshed should ensue in that quarter of the Union? That was enough for me to inquire into and consider; and if the chances had been one in a thousand that civil war would be the result, I should have felt that that one-thousandth chance should be guarded against by any reasonable sacrifice; because, gentlemen, sanguine as I am of the future prosperity of the country, strongly as I believe now, after what has passed, and especially after the enactment of those measures to which I

have referred, that it is likely to hold together, I yet believe that this Union once broken is incapable, according to all human experience, of being reconstructed in its original character, of being recemented by any chemistry, or art, or effort, or skill of man.'

وو

While I cannot doubt the correctness. of the conclusion, in which all these great men agree, that constitutional Union cannot be preserved without the cordial coöperation of the people of every section of the country, I am unwilling to surrender the hope that common interests, mutual dependence, and all the associations of the past will suffice again. to bind together the dissevered parts of the nation, if we shall adopt a policy of moderation and magnanimity that will permit the jealousies and fears which caused this great convulsion to be allayed, and the angry passions which it has aroused to subside. But the policy of coercion contemplates another alternative: that of subverting the existing constitutions of the States now in rebellion, and readmitting them into the Union with such modifications and restrictions of their constitutional rights as we shall deem most consistent with our own future prosperity. The consequences of such a course to them and to ourselves will form the subject of the following chapters.

CHAPTER IX.

Senator Sumner's Plan of Territorial Governments for the SouthThe President's Plan of "Reconstruction "-A detailed Explanation of the latter-Delusive character of the apparent Intention to submit the Emancipation Proclamation to the Supreme CourtThe Plan contemplates the Abolition of Slavery by a revolutionary overthrow of the State Constitutions-Nature of the Popular Element of the "reconstructed" State Governments-Probability of the acceptance of the Terms of Amnesty by the Southern People now within our Lines-Readiness of the Baser Element of a Conquered People to ingratiate itself with the ConquerorIllustrations of this Principle by the Conduct of Individuals in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and South Carolina during the Revolutionary War-Efforts of the British Authorities to reëstablish Civil Rule in South Carolina in the years 1780-1781— Their apparent success in bringing the People back to their Allegiance Their Severities towards those who refused to acknowledge themselves British Subjects.

I ASSUME that the people are nearly unanimously of the opinion that the existing military governments of the southern States must be superseded by civil governments of some kind, as soon as it is practicable to do so, with safety to the authority of the nation, and with due regard to the principle which pervade our political framework. I need not, therefore, consume any time in pointing out the inconveniences and dangers, attending an attempt permanently to maintain the present system.

There are two schemes of reëstablishing civil rule, which have met with favor among those who desire to escape, for a time at least, from the neces sity of confiding the reins of Government in the States to the hands of officers elected by the people, and responsible to the people. One of these is the plan, the recommendation of which is the object of the article which has already been frequently commented upon in these pages, entitled, "Our Domestic Relations." It is stated in the words of that article to be "the establishment of provisional governments under the authority of Congress, or simply by making the admission or recognition of the States depend upon the action of Congress." The latter clause of the sentence is not very intelligible, if the whole is regarded as the statement of two alternatives; but as the article commences with an attack upon the system of military governments, and as its whole scope is designed to show that the southern States have been reduced to the territorial condition, and that the public interests will not for the present allow the participation of the people in the Government, the author's meaning is sufficiently clear. It is that Congress shall create in the conquered region, governments corresponding to those which have formerly been erected in the western part of the country, in the first stages of territorial existence; that is to say, that the legislative, executive, and judicial functions shall be

administered by officers nominated by the President, and appointed by him, with the advice and consent of a Senate, composed wholly of members from the States which have remained loyal throughout the war. Whether the boundaries of the new territories are to correspond with those of the existing States, is not very apparent, nor, as I should judge from the author's course of reasoning, is it considered as very important. The time during which the territories thus erected, would be governed in the manner pointed out, is not designated; except that it is said in terms rather vague and indefinite in themselves, but sufficiently intelligible to those who are familiar with the idiosyncrasies of the class of politicians to which the author belongs, that the jurisdiction of Congress is to be "employed for the happiness, welfare and renown of the American people, changing slavery into freedom, and present chaos into a cosmos of perpetual beauty and power." And when the indefinite future shall have brought around the period in which the "cosmos" alluded to shall be in full working order, it is proposed that Congress shall erect new States out of the territories, and admit them into the Union. Such is the future to which a senator of the United States, the idol of his own State, and one of the recognized leaders of a great and now dominant party, invites the American people. Startling as it may appear; dangerous and destruc