Thursday, December 20, 2012

Disunion is Anarchy

Mr. Yancy – who was not captured while running the blockade, disguised as the “ancient mariner” made a speech on his arrival in New Orleans, a sketch of which appeared in our last, as copied from a Southern journal. – Mr. Yancy, who went out to Europe in high feather as a Confederate Commissioner to solicit foreign recognition of Jeff. Davis’ Government, returned quite chop-fallen – a wiser if not a better man.  Plainly he told the Louisiana people, in his speech, that European intervention was out of the question, and that “the South” has no friends abroad.  In his intense disgust he became candid, and frankly stated that one of the reasons why European powers will not interfere in American affairs, is the hope and belief that the permanent dissolution of the Union will weaken a nation of whose prosperity and greatness they had become jealous.  True words and well spoken!  But is Mr. Yancy conscious that he has thus presented a sound, invincible argument against the mischievous faction to which he belongs, and in favor of an undivided, combined and powerful Government?

One of the most painful causes of apprehension, with us, from a contemplation of a possible success of the rebellion, is the belittled and contemptible position in which the separated parts of our country would stand in the eyes of other nations.  As a whole, America is justly respected and feared by the wealthiest and strongest governments of the world.  Dismembered, divided and broken up, exhausted by petty internecine wars, the fragments would be the scorn and scoff of kingdoms, foreign secretaries and statesmen – the subjects of constant insult and the prey, perhaps, of invasion and conquest.  National weakness is a synonym of inevitable ruin.  The power of the United States once destroyed, administration is forever gone, and the haughtiness or greed of other governments would soon compel it to sink into an insignificance so mortifying, and imbecile that the disdain of foreign nations would be scarcely more galling than the disgust of the citizens at home.  We wonder that Mr. Yancy and his confreres never thought of this before.

No differences that have existed or now exist between the people of the Northern and Southern sections will ever be settled in any more permanent manner through the establishment of two Governments than can be done under one.  Indeed, there is far less prospect of each in a separation than in a continued Union. – England and France see this, and hence, whilst professing neutrality, their dearest hopes will be fulfilled if there shall be a dismemberment of the American Republic.  The present rebellion if successful, it may [be] but a precedent for future insurrections and secessions.  In the very nature of the system of the Confederate Government now sought to be established, the States comprising it may be indefinitely divided, the league depending solely upon the pleasure of the people of the several parts forming the compact.  So whilst it is not out of the range of possibility that the existing loyal States might hereafter be disrupted by revolution aided by the South and by European Governments, the Southern States would almost inevitably fall into paltry fragments. – The seceded districts are now held together by an interest of common defense, and would doubtless be always united in any war against their late associates, but let their independence once be acknowledge, and if they could not find pretexts for quarrel with the remaining States, political incongruities would soon furnish material for strife amongst themselves. – The dissolution of the Union, then, is equivalent to unending contention and anarchy, tending directly and inexorably to public and private ruin in every section, and consequently to the downfall of all the power and government in America.  Mr. Yancy has stated premises correctly; let him and his allies in secession pursue them to the logical conclusion. – {St. Louis Republican

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, April 5, 1862, p. 2

No comments: