in their operation, if not so well understood, as the laws of physical influence,) the party “whose conscience with injustice is oppressed,” must become dispirited, weakened in courage, and in the end unnerved and contemptible.  On the other hand, the sympathy that would be felt for the oppressed—­the comfort they would receive—­the encouragement that would be given them to assert their rights, would make it an impossibility, to keep them in slavish peace and submission.

This state of things would be greatly aggravated by the peculiarly morbid sensitiveness of the South to every thing that is supposed to touch her character.  Her highest distinction would then become her most troublesome one.  How, for instance, could her chivalrous sons bear to be taunted, wherever they went, on business or for pleasure, out of their own limits, with the cry “the knights of the lash!” “Go home and pay your laborers!” “Cease from the scourging of husbands and wives in each others presence—­from attending the shambles, to sell or buy as slaves those whom God has made of the same blood with yourselves—­your brethren—­your sisters!  Cease, high minded sons of the ’ANCIENT DOMINION,’ from estimating your revenue by the number of children you rear, to sell in the flesh market!” “Go home and pay your laborers!” “Go home and pay your laborers!” This would be a trial to which “southern chivalry” could not patiently submit.  Their “high honor,” their “undaunted spirit” would impel them to the field—­only to prove that the “last resort” requires something more substantial than mere “honor” and “spirit” to maintain it.  Suppose there should be a disagreement—­as in all likelihood there soon would, leading to war between the North and the South?  The North would scarcely have occasion to march a squadron to the field.  She would have an army that could be raised up by the million, at the fireside of her enemy.  It has been said, that during the late war with England, it was proposed to her cabinet, by some enterprising officers, to land five thousand men on the coast of South Carolina and proclaim liberty to the slates.  The success of the scheme was well thought of.  But then the example!  England herself held nearly a million of slaves at no greater distance from the scene of action than the West Indies. Now, a restraint of this kind on such a scheme does not exist.

It seems plain beyond the power of argument to make it plainer, that a slaveholding nation—­one under the circumstances in which the South separated from the North would be placed—­must be at the mercy of every free people having neither power to vindicate a right nor avenge a wrong.[A]

[Footnote A:  Governor Hayne, of South Carolina, spoke in high terms, a few years ago, of the ability that the South would possess, in a military point of view, because her great wealth would enable her, at all times, to command the services of mercenary troops.  Without stopping to dispute with him, as to her comparative wealth, I would remark, that he seemed entirely to have overlooked this truth—­that whenever a government is under the necessity of calling in foreign troops, to keep in subjection one half of the people, the power of the government has already passed into the hands of the Protectors.  They can and will, of course, act with whichever party will best subserve their purpose.]