north america-1-第81节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


d　West　would　have　acted　as　an　additional　tie　upon　them；　binding　them　to　the　finality　of　a　constitutional　enactment　to　which；　as　was　of　course　well　known；　they　strongly　object。　　There　was　no　question　of　Congress　interfering　with　slavery；　with　the　purport　of　extending　its　area　by　special　enactment；　and　therefore　by　such　a　pledge　the　North　and　West　could　gain　nothing；　but　the　South　would　in　prestige　have　gained　much。　But　that　third　proposition　as　to　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　and　the　faithful　execution　of　that　law　by　the　Northern　and　Western　States　would；　if　acceded　to　by　Mr。　Lincoln's　party；　have　amounted　to　an　unconditional　surrender　of　everything。　　What！　　Massachusetts　and　Connecticut　carry　out　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law？　　Ohio　carry　out　the　Fugitive　Slave　Law　after　the　〃Dred　Scott〃　decision　and　all　its　consequences？　　Mr。　Crittenden　might　as　well　have　asked　Connecticut；　Massachusetts；　and　Ohio　to　introduce　slavery　within　their　own　lands。　　The　Fugitive　Slave　Law　was　then；　as　it　is　now；　the　law　of　the　land；　it　was　the　law　of　the　United　States　as　voted　by　Congress；　and　passed　by　the　President；　and　acted　on　by　the　supreme　judge　of　the　United　States　Court。　　But　it　was　a　law　to　which　no　free　State　had　submitted　itself；　or　would　submit　itself。　　〃What！〃　the　English　reader　will　say；　〃sundry　States　in　the　Union　refuse　to　obey　the　laws　of　the　Unionrefuse　to　submit　to　the　constitutional　action　of　their　own　Congress？〃　　Yes。　　Such　has　been　the　position　of　this　country！　　To　such　a　dead　lock　has　it　been　brought　by　the　attempted　but　impossible　amalgamation　of　North　and　South。　　Mr。　Crittenden's　compromise　was　moonshine。　　It　was　utterly　out　of　the　question　that　the　free　States　should　bind　themselves　to　the　rendition　of　escaped　slaves；　or　that　Mr。　Lincoln；　who　had　just　been　brought　in　by　their　voices；　should　agree　to　any　compromise　which　should　attempt　so　to　bind　them。　　Lord　Palmerston　might　as　well　attempt　to　reenact　the　Corn　Laws。　Then　comes　the　question　whether　Mr。　Lincoln　or　his　government　could　have　prevented　the　war　after　he　had　entered　upon　his　office　in　March；　1861？　　I　do　not　suppose　that　any　one　thinks　that　he　could　have　avoided　secession　and　avoided　the　war　also；　that　by　any　ordinary　effort　of　government　he　could　have　secured　the　adhesion　of　the　Gulf　States　to　the　Union　after　the　first　shot　had　been　fired　at　Fort　Sumter。　　The　general　opinion　in　England　is；　I　take　it；　this　that　secession　then　was　manifestly　necessary；　and　that　all　the　blood…shed　and　money…shed；　and　all　this　destruction　of　commerce　and　of　agriculture　might　have　been　prevented　by　a　graceful　adhesion　to　an　indisputable　fact。　　But　there　are　some　facts；　even　some　indisputable　facts；　to　which　a　graceful　adherence　is　not　possible。　Could　King　Bomba　have　welcomed　Garibaldi　to　Naples？　　Can　the　Pope　shake　hands　with　Victor　Emmanuel？　　Could　the　English　have　surrendered　to　their　rebel　colonists　peaceable　possession　of　the　colonies？　　The　indisputability　of　a　fact　is　not　very　easily　settled　while　the　circumstances　are　in　course　of　action　by　which　the　fact　is　to　be　decided。　　The　men　of　the　Northern　States　have　not　believed　in　the　necessity　of　secession；　but　have　believed　it　to　be　their　duty　to　enforce　the　adherence　of　these　States　to　the　Union。　　The　American　governments　have　been　much　given　to　compromises；　but　had　Mr。　Lincoln　attempted　any　compromise　by　which　any　one　Southern　State　could　have　been　let　out　of　the　Union；　he　would　have　been　impeached。　　In　all　probability　the　whole　Constitution　would　have　gone　to　ruin；　and　the　Presidency　would　have　been　at　an　end。　　At　any　rate；　his　Presidency　would　have　been　at　an　end。　　When　secession；　or　in　other　words　rebellion；　was　once　commenced；　he　had　no　alternative　but　the　use　of　coercive　measures　for　putting　it　downthat　is；　he　had　no　alternative　but　war。　　It　is　not　to　be　supposed　that　he　or　his　ministry　contemplated　such　a　war　as　has　existedwith　600；000　men　in　arms　on　one　side；　each　man　with　his　whole　belongings　maintained　at　a　cost　of　150l。　per　annum；　or　ninety　millions　sterling　per　annum　for　the　army。　　Nor　did　we　when　we　resolved　to　put　down　the　French　revolution　think　of　such　a　national　debt　as　we　now　owe。　　These　things　grow　by　degrees；　and　the　mind　also　grows　in　becoming　used　to　them；　but　I　cannot　see　that　there　was　any　moment　at　which　Mr。　Lincoln　could　have　stayed　his　hand　and　cried　peace。　It　is　easy　to　say　now　that　acquiescence　in　secession　would　have　been　better　than　war；　but　there　has　been　no　moment　when　he　could　have　said　so　with　any　avail。　　It　was　incumbent　on　him　to　put　down　rebellion；　or　to　be　put　down　by　it。　　So　it　was　with　us　in　America　in　1776。　I　do　not　think　that　we　in　England　have　quite　sufficiently　taken　all　this　into　consideration。　　We　have　been　in　the　habit　of　exclaiming　very　loudly　against　the　war；　execrating　its　cruelty　and　anathematizing　its　results；　as　though　the　cruelty　were　all　superfluous　and　the　results　unnecessary。　　But　I　do　not　remember　to　have　seen　any　statement　as　to　what　the　Northern　States　should　have　donewhat　they　should　have　done；　that　is；　as　regards　the　South；　or　when　they　should　have　done　it。　　It　seems　to　me　that　we　have　decided　as　regards　them　that　civil　war　is　a　very　bad　thing；　and　that　therefore　civil　war　should　be　avoided。　　But　bad　things　cannot　always　be　avoided。　　It　is　this　feeling　on　our　part　that　has　produced　so　much　irritation　in　them　against　usreproducing；　of　course；　irritation　on　our　part　against　them。　　They　cannot　understand　that　we　should　not　wish　them　to　be　successful　in　putting　down　a　rebellion；　nor　can　we　understand　why　they　should　be　outrageous　against　us　for　standing　aloof；　and　keeping　our　hands；　if　it　be　only　possible；　out　of　the　fire。　When　Slidell　and　Mason　were　arrested；　my　opinions　were　not　changed；　but　my　feelings　were　altered。　　I　seemed　to　acknowledge　to　myself　that　the　treatment　to　which　England　had　been　subjected；　and　the　manner　in　which　that　treatment　was　discussed；　made　it　necessary　that　I　should　regard　the　question　as　it　existed　between　England　and　the　States；　rather　than　in　its　reference　to　the　North　and　South。　　I　had　always　felt　that　as　regarded　the　action　of　our　government　we　had　been　sans　reproche；　that　in　arranging　our　conduct　we　had　thought　neither　of　money　nor　political　influence；　but　simply　of　the　justice　of　the　casepromising　to　abstain　from　all　interference　and　keeping　that　promise　faithfully。　　It　had　been　quite　clear　to　me　that　the　men　of　the　North；　and　the　women　also；　had　failed　to　appreciate　this；　looking；　as　men　in　a　quarrel　always　do　look；　for　special　favor　on　their　side。　　Everything　that　England　did　was　wrong。　　If　a　private　merchant；　at　his　own　risk；　took　a　cargo　of　rifles　to　some　Southern　port；　that　act　to　Northern　eyes　was　an　act　of　English　interferenceof　favor　shown　to　the　South　by　England　as　a　nation；　but　twenty　shiploads　of　rifles　sent　from　England　to　the　North　merely　signified　a　brisk　trade　and　a　desire　for　profit。　　The　〃James　Adger；〃　a　Northern　man…of…war；　was　refitted　at　Southampton　as　a　matter　of　course。　　There　was　no　blame　to　England　for　that。　But　the　Nashville；　belonging　to　the　Confederates；　should　not　have　been　allowed　into　English　waters。　　It　was　useless　to　speak　of　neutrality。　　No　Northerner　would　understand　that　a　rebel　could　have　any　mutual　right。　　The　South　had　no　claim　in　his　eyes　as　a　belligerent；　though　the　North　claimed　all　those　rights　which　he　could　only　enjoy　by　the　fact　of　there　being　a　recognized　war　between　him　and　his　enemy　the　South。　　The　North　was　learning　to　hate　England；　and　day　by　day　the　feeling　grew　upon　me　that；　much　as　I　wished　to　espouse　the　cause　of　the　North；　I　should　have　to　espouse　the　cause　of　my　own　country。　　Then　Slidell　and　Mason　were　arrested；　and　I　began　to　calculate　how　long　I　might　remain　in　the　country。　　〃There　is　no　danger。　　We　are　quite　right；〃　the　lawyers　said。　　〃There　are　Vattel；　and　Puffendorff；　and　Stowell；　and　Phillimore；　and　Wheaton；〃　said　the　ladies。　　〃Ambassadors　are　contraband　all　the　world　overmore　so　than　gunpowder；　and　if　taken　in　a　neutral　bottom；〃　etc。　　I　wonder　why　ships　are　always　called　bottoms　when　spoken　of　with　legal　technicality？　　But　neither　the　lawyers　nor　the　ladies　convinced　me。　　I　know　that　there　are　matters　which　will　be　read　not　in　accordance　with　any　written　law；　but　in　accordance　with　the　bias　of　the　reader's　mind。　　Such　laws　are　made　to　be　strained　any　way。　　I　knew　how　it　would　be。　　All　the　legal　acumen　of　New　England　declared　the　seizure　of　Slidell　and　Mason　to　be　right。　　The　legal　acumen　of　Old　England　has　declared　it　to　be　wrong；　and　I　have　no　doubt　that　the　ladies　of　Old　England　can　prove　it　to　be　wrong　out　of　Yattel；　Puffendorff；　Stowell；　Phillimore；　and　Wheaton。　〃But　there's　Grotius；〃　I　said；　to　an　elderly　female　at　New　York；　who　had　quoted　to　me　some　half　dozen　writers　on　international　law；　thinking　thereby　that　I　should　trump　her　last　card。　　〃I've　looked　into　Grotius　too；〃　said　she；　〃and　as　far　as　I　can　see；〃　etc。　etc。　etc。　　So　I　had　to　fall　back　again　on　the　convictions　to　which　instinct　and　common　sense　had　brought　me。　　I　never　doubted　for　a　moment　that　those　convictions　would　be　supported　by　English　lawyers。　I　left　Boston　with　a　sad　feeling　at　my　heart　that　a　quarrel　was　imminent　between　England　and　the　States；　and　that　any　such　quarrel　must　be　destructive　to　the　cause　of　the　North。　　I　had　never