All the oppression and cruel persecution inflicted on the Jews during the Middle Ages was insufficient to utterly depress that unhappy people; individuals perished in untold numbers, but the race survived, and silently and gradually it has assumed a position in the social scale which enables it to inflict (legally) many of the pains and penalties it illegally suffered. The Jewish people, than whom none were at one time so despised, are gradually becoming the virtual regenerators and rulers of a large portion of the civilized world, both by their intellect and their "weight of metal." The destinies of Europe, and with Europe of the greater part of the world, are at this moment in the hands of the Rothschilds, and the power of Austria has found no more potent adversary than Daniel Manin, "the father of Venice," who was of Jewish parentage.

Again, another despised and oppressed portion of the human family, "the poor negro," has become, in a manner as striking as unexpected, the arbiter of the destinies of a nation numbering some thirty millions of souls, and, indirectly, probably of as many more. The slave now morally dominates, unwittingly, over one of the freest, most enlightened, and intellectual among the nations of the earth. The "irrepressible conflict" now raging in the United States was set in motion by the poor helpless African, though he himself has had no hand in the strife. In this well-merited retribution on the aggressors, there is a sublime vindication of the eternal laws of justice and humanity which shows most conclusively that, although man may for a time prosper in his evil ways, defying natural and moral laws, yet the finger of Providence still directs the moral world, and that nations, as well as individuals, must sooner or

later inevitably pay the penalty of their wrong doings.

At the present day, the great North American Republic presents one of the saddest spectacles civilization can exhibit. It is a nation divided against itself. Men born on the same soil, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, and protected by the same self-imposed laws, are arrayed in vindictive hostility and deadly strife against each other. The strife engendered by the curse of slavery, which was evoked in the nation even from the hour of its birth, has spread, until at length it has reached the vital organs of the social body, and which, unless it be forcibly removed, it will doubtless destroy.

The progress of this insidious peril has not been overlooked, nor has the present crisis been altogether unexpected. But no serious efforts have been made to stay the course of this fatal danger. Palliatives have been scorned, expedients for indefinitely postponing the crisis have failed-while it has been hastened by intemperate acts in the other portions of the social body, in those untainted with the seeds of the disorder. And now the day of retribution having arrived, nothing remains but amputation, or secession, which, it is feared, will precede complete disruption only for a brief space.

This spectacle is one of the deepest interest to us. The people of the United States are most emphatically our brethren. The offspring of British colonies established in North America during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, amply recruited from our own firesides during the past century, they are but transplanted Englishmen. Greatly modified, it is true, by local circumstances, yet still English at heart, and still retaining the natural pride and affection a son feels for an august parent. The result, therefore, of their present fratricidal strife cannot be a matter of indifference to us. Although the issue is as yet uncertain, we cannot suppose that the North, or Unionists, will spare any efforts to maintain the integrity of the Constitution by which the people became a nation.

The early history of the United States has an important bearing on the struggle at present going on. The population of the colonies was scattered over a vast

extent of territory, which from differences of climate, and froin local causes, gradually developed widely different, and even antagonistic interests. The fertility of the soil in the southern and middle States clearly marked them out for agricultural industry. The climate demanded that this industry should be accomplished, in the South, by the labour of the African race, who alone could endure the effects of a climate which quickly destroyed the European when ever exposed to its influence. Slavery was deeply rooted in the American soil, even long before it had become America. It was a fatal dowry left by the English colonists, and one that could not well be refused. The rich lands were of no value in the absence of suitable labourers. The Northern and Eastern States, with a less favouring climate, and less productive soil, saw their interest in fostering manufacturing industry, which, in the presence of a scarcity of skilled labour and capital, required "protection," and thus there soon arose conflicting fiscal interests between the North and the South. The former demanded exorbitant protecting duties on imports; the latter required, and clearly were entitled to, a low rate of duty, but had to give way before the influence of the North, with out receiving any adequate compensation. This tariff question has on more than one occasion nearly led to rupture be tween the North and the South. In 1828, a revision of the protective tariff, with a view to the reduction of the duties, was vehemently demanded on the part of South Carolina, and when the tariff of 1828 had become a law, this State professed her intense dissatisfaction with it, on the ground that the revenue had been diminished while the policy of protection was preserved. This State assembled a Convention, and thereby assumed the right to "nullify" the tariff, so far, at least, as she was concerned, and to interdict its further enforcement within her borders.

This proceeding was undoubtedly unconstitutional. General Jackson, the President, despatched General Scott to Charleston, the capital of South Carolina, to support the collection of the revenue; and he also launched against the "nullifiers" a proclamation of remarkable vigour, taking the broadest ground of hostility against the power of a State to nullify an act of Congress, or effectively pronounce it invalid. A collision of Federal and State authority seemed im

minent. In the midst of the excitement thus engendered, Congress met; and the Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means introduced a Bill, proposing a sweeping and radical reduction of the Tariff, so as to divest it of every feature of protection. For a time, however, it seemed probable that the United States were about to be plunged into a bloody civil war on account of a system which was to be almost simultaneously abandoned. This Bill was accepted by both parties in Congress, and by the nation, and was passed in both Houses by large majorities.

The crime of high treason is by no means common in the United States. The very word "treason" is not understood by the bulk of the people, so calm and peaceful has been her national life during the past two generations Only one important case of treason is recorded in her judicial annals-that of Aaron Burr.

Fifty-six years have elapsed since Burr committed the acts which led to his trial. He had been Vice-President of the United States, under the presidency of Thomas Jefferson; but his hopes of becoming president were not realized. He not only failed in that project, but on the reelection of Jefferson, was set aside as Vice, and Clinton, of new York, chosen in his stead; and he failed again in his effort to become governor of that State. Smarting under these defeats he consoled himself by plotting. His scheme was to establish an independent government west of the Alleghanies, which should include Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, the territory of Louisiana (out of which the States of Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana, and Kansas have since been made), and part of Mexico. Some of his letters and confessions justify the belief that the form of government he proposed to adopt was mon archical, with himself as sovereign and New Orleans as his capital.

It is certain, at least, that he looked to the secession of the states and territories mentioned, to the acquisition of part of Mexico, and to the consolidation of a great empire on the banks of the Missis sippi. He proceeded so far in his enter prise as to collect bodies of men in various places, to seize some military posts, to secure the confederacy of certain dissatisfied officers of the army and navy, and to enter into negotiations with some foreign powers, whose aid he proposed to

secure by allowing them peculiar commercial privileges.

From the contemporaneous accounts of his proceedings, it would seem that he obtained very considerable encouragement from the people of the territories of Mississippi and Louisiana. It is supposed that the pulse of General Jackson was felt; for in a letter to Claiborne, he says: "I hate the Dons, and would like to see Mexico reduced; but I would die in the last ditch before I would see the Union disunited." Butat Frankfort in Kentucky, where Burr was arrested by a zealous district attorney, he was triumphantly acquitted, and honoured by a public ball afterwards.

Matters were working favourably enough for his schemes, a considerable force had been collected on Blennerhasset's Island, in the Ohio river, and newspapers were sedulously engaged in imbuing the people on the Mississippi with secessionist doctrines, when President Jefferson issued his famous proclamation against Burr. This vigorous measure turned the tide. The people, brought face to face with the emergency, naturally took the side of the government and loyalty. The legislature of Ohio authorized the seizure of Burr's boats. The legislature of Kentucky posted militia to guard the river. The governor of Mississippi territory called out 400 men to arrest Burr. At New Orleans several of his accomplices were arrested. The great secessionist himself was taken in Mississippi, sent to Richmond, in Virginia, and there tried for high treason. Chief Justice Marshall presided, and charged the jury that there was no evidence of there having been any assemblage of men in arms to resist the government, and no evidence to connect Burr with the gatherings which had taken place on Bennerhasset's Island.

If the government had proved that there had been assemblages of men in arms, instigated by Burr, and intending to resist the government, it would seem that he would have been convicted and hanged.

"Treason against the United States," says the Constitution (art. 3, sect. 3), "shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." A subsequent clause in the Constitution empowered Congress to pronounce the penalty of treason, which it did in the Statute of 30th of April, 1790, declaring that persons convicted of treason should "suffer death" and that persons "adjudged

guilty of misprision of treason,"—that is to say, persons who knew of the treason and did not make it known to the authorities-should be "imprisoned not exceeding seven years, and fined not exceeding a thousand dollars." This is the law of treason in the United States.

The causes of the present rebellion are immediate and remote. The remote and indirect was the emancipation of the slaves in the British West Indies in 1834. The immediate and direct cause was in the election of Mr. Lincoln to the presidency. Heretofore the presidents were mostly men of Southern choice or approval, only five out of fifteen have been Northern men. The election of Mr. Lincoln appeared to cut off all the hopes the Southerners had of maintaining their ground, for they became desperate, and without waiting the course of legal constitutional measures, have plunged recklessly into the anarchy of civil war.

In answer to the question, "What does the South want?" Governor Letchter, of Virginia, replied:-"The South asks only for the fair and faithful execution of the laws passed for the protection and recovery of her property-that the North will cease to embarrass, and lend its aid to effect their execution according to their letter and spirit-that if her property shall escape and be found in the non-slaveholding States, that it be promptly restored to its rightful owner. If the North will respect and uphold the rights of the States, the Union will be perpetual, our country will continue to grow in power and influence, the people of all sections will have secured to them the blessings of peace and order, and a prosperity such as has never been known or appreciated in our past history will be the necessary result."

We get a clearer and more authentic view of what the South wanted, by an examination of the Constitution published by the Southern Confederation. It is a copy of the original Constitution of the United States with some variations, and these are so trifling, that it cannot be doubted that the Union would have agreed to their introduction into an amended Constitution legally adopted.

1. In the preamble the words-"We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character"-are substituted for the old words, "We, the people of the United States," etc. The object of this change is to assert separate State sovereignty, in

66

volving the right of secession at will. The phrase State sovereignty" is an absurdity under the Union, for how can a state be sovereign and independent when it is subject in acts which affect the national policy to Federal control under the power of Congress?

2. In the article on the House of Representatives, it is stated that "no person of foreign birth, not a citizen of the Confederate States, shall be allowed to vote for any office, civil or political, State or Federal. No such provision is found in the old Constitution, and owing to its omission, the States of Michigan, Wisconsin, and others, have granted the suffrage to foreigners before naturalization. It was to guard against this abuse that the new proviso was adopted.

3. In the section on the apportionment of representatives, the word slaves is substituted for the old expression, "other persons," and it is stated that the representation shall be in the ratio of not more than one representative to every 50,000, instead of 30,000, as fixed in the old Constitution.

4. The proviso of the old Constitution requiring senators to have been nine years citizens is omitted.

66

5. The new Constitution states that Congress may, by law, grant to the principal officer in each of the executive departments a seat upon the floor of either House, with the privilege of discussing any measures pertaining to his department." This is borrowed from the British system; with us, Ministers must be members of one or other House, and are expected to defend their policy in person. The obvious advantages of the method, both to the Government and the Opposition, commended it to the adoption of the Southern Congress.

6. Power is given to the President to approve certain appropriations, while disapproving others in the same bill. This is an obvious improvement upon the present system, which often operates to compel the Executive to sanction appropriations of which he disapproves for fear of defeating others which are neces

employed. It is further stated that "No bounties shall be granted from the Treasury, nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations be levied to promote or foster any branch of industry." Thus the axe is laid at the root of the fatal protective system which has done so much injury to the United States.

8. We now come to the most important innovations attempted in the new Constitution. The old Constitution avoided the use of the word slave, and called slaves "other persons." The framers of the old Constitution, who had just fought the battle of freedom and liberty, and declared "all men free and equal"-Jefferson, Washington, Madison,. Hamilton, Adams, etc.—were all heartily ashamed of slavery, and desired to see it abolished. The framers of the new Constitution have no such scruples. In the clause respecting fugitive slaves, which is otherwise copied from the old Constitution, the word slave is again used. The following are other clauses bearing upon the subject of slavery :

"The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slave-holding States or territories of the United States of America is hereby forbidden.

"The citizens of each State shall be

entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property, and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

"The Confederate States may acquire new territory, and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States lying without the limits of the several States, and may permit them, at such time and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognised and protected by Congress and by the Territorial Government, and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.'

These clauses aim at the unlimited geographical extension of slavery, which is

directly opposed to a principle maintained by the Union-to confine slavery within its present boundaries.

9. Permission is given to lay export duties on articles exported from any State by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses. This is obviously with a view to lay an export duty on cotton.

10. The new Constitution fixes the Presidential term of office at six instead of four years, and renders the President ineligible. These innovations will commend themselves to all who have watched the mischief produced by the too speedy recurrence of elections, and the manœuvres of acting Presidents for re-election, They would be gladly adopted by the people throughout the Union.

The Slavery question has frequently forced itself upon the attention of the statesmen of the United States; but more especially on those occasions when New States were admitted into the Union. In framing the State constitutions, the question of tolerating or ignoring slavery as a permanent institution could not well he evaded. On the occasion of the admission of Kentucky into the Union, the sentiment of Washington, of Patrick Henry, of Jefferson, of George Mason, and most other eminent citizens of Virginia, favoured a policy of gradual emancipation, as was adopted by Pennsylvania in 1780; but the proposal was voted down by a large majority, and it was again rejected when the constitution of the State of Kentucky was revised in 1849.

The Missouri Controversy, in 1821, was another crisis growing out of the Slavery question. The agitation was stayed by the Compromise Act, which provided for the admission of Missouri into the Union under her Slave Constitution, on condition that slavery should, in all the remaining territories of the United States north of latitude 36° 30', the Southern boundary of Missouri, be for ever prohibited.

To secure themselves in their critical position it has ever been the policy of the South to extend the area of slavery, and thus obtain a preponderating influence in the Senate. By increasing the number of slaves they at the same time augmented the number of their own congressional representatives.

The number of representatives is permanently fixed at 233, apportioned in the following manner: To the number of the free population, three-fifths of the

number of slaves is added; the sum forms the representative population; this, divided by 233, gives the ratio of popula tion required for a representative. The representative population of each State, divided by the ratio, gives the number of representatives to which it is entitled. By this arrangement Georgia, with its 462,000 slaves, gains an addition of one representative to Congress, and Virginia of another. As the total slave population is about four millions, the Slave States have a total of twenty votes. on account of their slave population, or about nine per cent. of the total representation. This unjust privilege of the Southerners appropriating to themselves the votes denied to those who ought to exercise them (for no coloured person is allowed to vote), has doubtless been the chief cause of the protracted political struggle on the slavery question.

Besides being a geographical question, slavery had also its ethical, political, and social phases, each of which has had its share in promoting the present strife. The North, which could do without slavery, preached a crusade against it on abstract grounds, on its moral iniquity and sin, totally ignoring the fact that the South could not exist without it.

Eloquent writers, with Channing at their head, urged every plea, exhausted every argument, to prove that slavery was wrong; which no one, not even the Southern slaveholders themselves, ever for a moment doubted or disputed, upon an abstract view of the question. An army of "abolitionists" sprang up, who made it their business to excite the slave against his master, to promote and foster insurrection, and to employ every other unlawful means for the realization of the great principle of "abolition."

Finding themselves thus assailed at their most vital social point, it is not to be wondered that the Southerners considered seriously how they could best meet the Northern aggression; and it must be admitted that they only resorted to purely defensive measures. To prevent their slaves from reading the inflammatory publications emanating from the North, the planters were constrained to stop teaching the young negro to read, and to expel summarily all abolitionist itinerating preachers from their territories.

It is impossible to justify the proceedings of the abolitionists, who proposed no remedy for the evil, slavery, except