He cannot be compared to our Prime Minister, seeing that the President himself exercises political power, and is responsible for its exercise.  Mr. Seward’s speech simply amounted to a declaration that separation was a thing of which the Union would neither hear, speak, nor, if possible, think.  Things looked very like it; but no, they could never come to that!  The world was too good, and especially the American world.  Mr. Seward had no specific against secession; but let every free man strike his breast, look up to heaven, determine to be good, and all would go right.  A great deal had been expected from Mr. Seward, and when this speech came out, we in England were a little disappointed, and nobody presumed even then that the North would let the South go.

It will be argued by those who have gone into the details of American politics that an acceptance of the Crittenden compromise at this point would have saved the war.  What is or was the Crittenden compromise I will endeavor to explain hereafter; but the terms and meaning of that compromise can have no bearing on the subject.  The Republican party who were in power disapproved of that compromise, and could not model their course upon it.  The Republican party may have been right or may have been wrong; but surely it will not be argued that any political party elected to power by a majority should follow the policy of a minority, lest that minority should rebel.  I can conceive of no government more lowly placed than one which deserts the policy of the majority which supports it, fearing either the tongues or arms of a minority.

As the next scene in the play, the State of South Carolina bombarded Fort Sumter.  Was that to be the moment for a peaceable separation?  Let us suppose that O’Connell had marched down to the Pigeon House, at Dublin, and had taken it, in 1843, let us say, would that have been an argument to us for allowing Ireland to set up for herself?  Is that the way of men’s minds, or of the minds of nations?  The powers of the President were defined by law, as agreed upon among all the States of the Union, and against that power and against that law South Carolina raised her hand, and the other States joined her in rebellion.  When circumstances had come to that, it was no longer possible that the North should shun the war.  To my thinking the rights of rebellion are holy.  Where would the world have been, or where would the world hope to be, without rebellion?  But let rebellion look the truth in the face, and not blanch from its own consequences.  She has to judge her own opportunities and to decide on her own fitness.  Success is the test of her judgment.  But rebellion can never be successful except by overcoming the power against which she raises herself.  She has no right to expect bloodless triumphs; and if she be not the stronger in the encounter which she creates, she must bear the penalty of her rashness.  Rebellion is justified by being better