[Copied by Justin Sanders from the
Official Records, Ser IV, vol 1, pp. 81-85.]
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political
connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their
confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten
years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding
confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored
to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently
refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that
property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive
us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of
our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could
arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections
of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still
attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that
time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further
insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and
demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm
hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of
the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the
Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally
full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that
they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of
anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the
Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the
people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present
name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party.
While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political
heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial
restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the
administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery
it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the
way of the formation of the Constitution. While the subordination and the political and
social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent
that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the
original thirteen. The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States and
the Constitution was made with direct reference to that fact. But a distinct abolition
party was not formed in the United States for more than half a century after the
Government went into operation. The main reason was that the North, even if united, could
not control both branches of the Legislature during any portion of that time. Therefore
such an organization must have resulted either in utter failure or in the total overthrow
of the Government. The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the
Federal Government; that of the the South not at all. In the first years of the Republic
the navigating, commercial, and manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit
and aggrandizement at the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of
fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet
continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating
interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in
the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an
absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without
diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have
sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the
public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the
maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above
$2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with
the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to
mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment
of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of
postal deficiency. The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and
has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors. This interest was
confined mainly to the Eastern and Middle non-slave-holding States. Wielding these great
States it held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its
power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and
reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition
of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor the infancy of their business in
this country, the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other
countries toward them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the
necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These
reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general
acquiescence of the whole country.
But when these reasons ceased they were no less clamorous for
Government protection, but their clamors were less heeded-- the country had put the
principle of protection upon trial and condemned it. After having enjoyed protection to
the extent of from 15 to 200 per cent. upon their entire business for above thirty years,
the act of 1846 was passed. It avoided sudden change, but the principle was settled, and
free trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of the American
people. The South and the Northwestern States sustained this policy. There was but small
hope of its reversal; upon the direct issue, none at all.
All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new
allies. The anti-slavery sentiment of the North offered the best chance for success. An
anti-slavery party must necessarily look to the North alone for support, but a united
North was now strong enough to control the Government in all of its departments, and a
sectional party was therefore determined upon. Time and issues upon slavery were necessary
to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of anti-slavery, which it was well known
was very general among the people of the North, had been long dormant or passive; it
needed only a question to arouse it into aggressive activity. This question was before us.
We had acquired a large territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern
it; how, in relation to slavery, was the question then demanding solution. This state of
facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the North and the
conflict began. Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude
slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and
efficient exercise of this power to that end. This insulting and unconstitutional demand
was met with great moderation and firmness by the South. We had shed our blood and paid
our money for its acquisition; we demanded a division of it on the line of the Missouri
restriction or an equal participation in the whole of it. These propositions were refused,
the agitation became general, and the public danger was great. The case of the South was
impregnable. The price of the acquisition was the blood and treasure of both sections-- of
all, and, therefore, it belonged to all upon the principles of equity and justice.
The Constitution delegated no power to Congress to excluded
either party from its free enjoyment; therefore our right was good under the Constitution.
Our rights were further fortified by the practice of the Government from the beginning.
Slavery was forbidden in the country northwest of the Ohio River by what is called the
ordinance of 1787. That ordinance was adopted under the old confederation and by the
assent of Virginia, who owned and ceded the country, and therefore this case must stand on
its own special circumstances. The Government of the United States claimed territory by
virtue of the treaty of 1783 with Great Britain, acquired territory by cession from
Georgia and North Carolina, by treaty from France, and by treaty from Spain. These
acquisitions largely exceeded the original limits of the Republic. In all of these
acquisitions the policy of the Government was uniform. It opened them to the settlement of
all the citizens of all the States of the Union. They emigrated thither with their
property of every kind (including slaves). All were equally protected by public authority
in their persons and property until the inhabitants became sufficiently numerous and
otherwise capable of bearing the burdens and performing the duties of self-government,
when they were admitted into the Union upon equal terms with the other States, with
whatever republican constitution they might adopt for themselves.
Under this equally just and beneficent policy law and order,
stability and progress, peace and prosperity marked every step of the progress of these
new communities until they entered as great and prosperous commonwealths into the
sisterhood of American States. In 1820 the North endeavored to overturn this wise and
successful policy and demanded that the State of Missouri should not be admitted into the
Union unless she first prohibited slavery within her limits by her constitution. After a
bitter and protracted struggle the North was defeated in her special object, but her
policy and position led to the adoption of a section in the law for the admission of
Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory acquired from France
lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude and outside of Missouri. The
venerable Madison at the time of its adoption declared it unconstitutional. Mr. Jefferson
condemned the restriction and foresaw its consequences and predicted that it would result
in the dissolution of the Union. His prediction is now history. The North demanded the
application of the principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired
from Mexico and all other parts of the public domain then and in all future time. It was
the announcement of her purpose to appropriate to herself all the public domain then owned
and thereafter to be acquired by the United States. The claim itself was less arrogant and
insulting than the reason with which she supported it. That reason was her fixed purpose
to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in the States where it exists. The South
with great unanimity declared her purpose to resist the principle of prohibition to the
last extremity. This particular question, in connection with a series of questions
affecting the same subject, was finally disposed of by the defeat of prohibitory
legislation.
The Presidential election of 1852 resulted in the total
overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their party friends. Immediately after this
result the anti-slavery portion of the defeated party resolved to unite all the elements
in the North opposed to slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their
hostility to slavery everywhere. This is the party two whom the people of the North have
committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated.
They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories, hostility to
it everywhere, the equality of the black and white races, disregard of all constitutional
guarantees in its favor, were boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its
followers.
With these principles on their banners and these utterances
on their lips the majority of the people of the North demand that we shall receive them as
our rulers.
The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal
principle of this organization.
For forty years this question has been considered and debated
in the halls of Congress, before the people, by the press, and before the tribunals of
justice. The majority of the people of the North in 1860 decided it in their own favor. We
refuse to submit to that judgment, and in vindication of our refusal we offer the
Constitution of our country and point to the total absence of any express power to exclude
us. We offer the practice of our Government for the first thirty years of its existence in
complete refutation of the position that any such power is either necessary or proper to
the execution of any other power in relation to the Territories. We offer the judgment of
a large minority of the people of the North, amounting to more than one-third, who united
with the unanimous voice of the South against this usurpation; and, finally, we offer the
judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest judicial tribunal of our
country, in our favor. This evidence ought to be conclusive that we have never surrendered
this right. The conduct of our adversaries admonishes us that if we had surrendered it, it
is time to resume it.
The faithless conduct of our adversaries is not confined to
such acts as might aggrandize themselves or their section of the Union. They are content
if they can only injure us. The Constitution declares that persons charged with crimes in
one State and fleeing to another shall be delivered up on the demand of the executive
authority of the State from which they may flee, to be tried in the jurisdiction where the
crime was committed. It would appear difficult to employ language freer from ambiguity,
yet for above twenty years the non-slave-holding States generally have wholly refused to
deliver up to us persons charged with crimes affecting slave property. Our confederates,
with punic faith, shield and give sanctuary to all criminals who seek to deprive us of
this property or who use it to destroy us. This clause of the Constitution has no other
sanction than their good faith; that is withheld from us; we are remediless in the Union;
out of it we are remitted to the laws of nations.
A similar provision of the Constitution requires them to
surrender fugitives from labor. This provision and the one last referred to were our main
inducements for confederating with the Northern States. Without them it is historically
true that we would have rejected the Constitution. In the fourth year of the Republic
Congress passed a law to give full vigor and efficiency to this important provision. This
act depended to a considerable degree upon the local magistrates in the several States for
its efficiency. The non-slave-holding States generally repealed all laws intended to aid
the execution of that act, and imposed penalties upon those citizens whose loyalty to the
Constitution and their oaths might induce them to discharge their duty. Congress then
passed the act of 1850, providing for the complete execution of this duty by Federal
officers. This law, which their own bad faith rendered absolutely indispensible for the
protection of constitutional rights, was instantly met with ferocious revilings and all
conceivable modes of hostility. The Supreme Court unanimously, and their own local courts
with equal unanimity (with the single and temporary exception of the supreme court of
Wisconsin), sustained its constitutionality in all of its provisions. Yet it stands to-day
a dead letter for all practicable purposes in every non-slave-holding State in the Union.
We have their convenants, we have their oaths to keep and observe it, but the unfortunate
claimant, even accompanied by a Federal officer with the mandate of the highest judicial
authority in his hands, is everywhere met with fraud, with force, and with legislative
enactments to elude, to resist, and defeat him. Claimants are murdered with impunity;
officers of the law are beaten by frantic mobs instigated by inflammatory appeals from
persons holding the highest public employment in these States, and supported by
legislation in conflict with the clearest provisions of the Constitution, and even the
ordinary principles of humanity. In several of our confederate States a citizen cannot
travel the highway with his servant who may voluntarily accompany him, without being
declared by law a felon and being subjected to infamous punishments. It is difficult to
perceive how we could suffer more by the hostility than by the fraternity of such
brethren.
The public law of civilized nations requires every State to
restrain its citizens or subjects from committing acts injurious to the peace and security
of any other State and from attempting to excite insurrection, or to lessen the security,
or to disturb the tranquillity of their neighbors, and our Constitution wisely gives
Congress the power to punish all offenses against the laws of nations.
These are sound and just principles which have received the
approbation of just men in all countries and all centuries; but they are wholly
disregarded by the people of the Northern States, and the Federal Government is impotent
to maintain them. For twenty years past the abolitionists and their allies in the Northern
States have been engaged in constant efforts to subvert our institutions and to excite
insurrection and servile war among us. They have sent emissaries among us for the
accomplishment of these purposes. Some of these efforts have received the public sanction
of a majority of the leading men of the Republican party in the national councils, the
same men who are now proposed as our rulers. These efforts have in one instance led to the
actual invasion of one of the slave-holding States, and those of the murderers and
incendiaries who escaped public justice by flight have found fraternal protection among
our Northern confederates.
These are the same men who say the Union shall be preserved.
Such are the opinions and such are the practices of the
Republican party, who have been called by their own votes to administer the Federal
Government under the Constitution of the United States. We know their treachery; we know
the shallow pretenses under which they daily disregard its plainest obligations. If we
submit to them it will be our fault and not theirs. The people of Georgia have ever been
willing to stand by this bargain, this contract; they have never sought to evade any of
its obligations; they have never hitherto sought to establish any new government; they
have struggled to maintain the ancient right of themselves and the human race through and
by that Constitution. But they know the value of parchment rights in treacherous hands,
and therefore they refuse to commit their own to the rulers whom the North offers us. Why?
Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed $3,000,000,000 of our
property in the common territories of the Union; put it under the ban of the Republic in
the States where it exists and out of the protection of Federal law everywhere; because
they give sanctuary to thieves and incendiaries who assail it to the whole extent of their
power, in spite of their most solemn obligations and covenants; because their avowed
purpose is to subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property but
the destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our
homes, our altars, and our firesides. To avoid these evils we resume the powers which our
fathers delegated to the Government of the United States, and henceforth will seek new
safeguards for our liberty, equality, security, and tranquillity.
[Approved, Tuesday, January 29, 1861] |
