Chapter IV: Part 4

I can say with great earnestness that no part of our journeyings gave us more pleasure than that through the Scandinavian countries, and no public have impressed me more favorably. If I were going to remain over another year I should go back to Norway at least and far enough north to see the midnight sun. But we expect to leave Paris about the middle of January, to return to the States by the way of India, China, and Japan. The Secretary of the Navy has been kind enough to invite us to go on a man-of-war which leaves the United States to-day for the Chinese squadron, via the Mediterranean and Suez. I first declined but since cabled my acceptance. This will probably bring us around home about next October or November.

I am sorry to say that I do not get favorable news from Orvil. He does not seem to improve.

Julia joins me in love to Mary and the children and in kindest regards to yourself.

I hope you did not forward the stones presented by the Consul.--Julia says to tell Mary that she got a very rich fur cloak in Paris and hopes she got one also. Is there anything we can do for you in Paris?

Very truly yours,

U.S. GRANT.

Rangoon, Burma, March 20th, '79.

MY DEAR MR. CRAMER:

We have now been very well through India and are this far on our way to the farther East. The weather has been pleasant until within the last few days. But now it is becoming very warm, and as we have yet to go through the Straits of Malacca near the equator before turning north, we must expect some discomfort. I have been very much pleased with English rule and English hospitality in India. With that rule two hundred and fifty millions of uncivilized people are living at peace with each other, and are not only drawing their subsistence from the soil but are exporting a large excess over imports from it. It would be a sad day for the people of India and for the commerce of the world if the English should withdraw. We hope to be in Hong Kong by the middle of April, and farther north in China as soon thereafter as possible. When a good climate is reached we shall regulate our further movements by the reports of weather on seas to be traversed, and climate of places to be visited. At present, however, we expect to reach San Francisco about the first half of July. Although homesick to be settled down I dread getting back. The clamor of the partisan and so-called independent press win be such as to make life there unpleasant for a time.

Mrs. Grant joins me in love to you, Mary, and the children.

I have to-day written a letter to Mr. Corbin.

Very truly yours,

U.S. GRANT.

P.S. Julia asks me to add, to tell Mary that the English speak in the highest terms of the work being done all through this country by the missionaries, especially in an educational way. They say they are doing much good.

[To his niece, Clara Cramer.]

New York City, Sept. 27th, 1883.

MY DEAR CLARA:

On my return from the trip over the North Pacific Railroad to the Pacific Coast last Friday, I found your excellent and welcome letter, with enclosures. Your aunt was very much pleased with your letter and poetry as well as with your essay. They all do you great credit, and I think you can well sustain yourself as a writer with any young lady of your age in this or any other land.

My trip over the northern route to the Pacific about completes my personal observation of every part of our country. I was not prepared to see so rich a country or one so rapidly developing. Across the continent where but a few years ago the Indian held undisputed sway, there is now a continuous settlement, and every ten or fifteen miles a town or city, each with spires of the school house and the church. The soil for almost the entire distance is as fertile as that of Illinois. I saw your Aunt Jennie yesterday. She is quite well. All my family are well and join in love to you. I think neither your Aunt nor I will ever visit Europe again. We may, however, change our minds. But we are getting a little too old to enjoy travelling, and then we have such pleasant homes for both summer and winter.

Love to your father and mother.

Yours truly,

U.S. GRANT.

3 East 66th Street, June 10th, '84.

DEAR CLARA:

Your letter, with one from your Aunt Jennie, reached me a few days since. I regret that I have not more cheerful news to write you than I have. Financially the Grant family is ruined for the present, and by the most stupendous frauds ever perpetrated. But your Aunt Jennie must not fret over it. I still have a home and as long as I live she shall enjoy it as a matter of right; at least until she recovers what she has lost. Fred is young, active, honest, and intelligent, and will work with a vim to recuperate his losses. Of course his first effort will be to repay his aunts.--We go to Long Branch this week. We expected to live with Fred this summer in Morristown, N.J. But failing to rent our cottage we will occupy it and Fred will live with us and rent his if he can.

All send love to you, your father and mother and Aunt Jennie.

Yours affectionately,

U.S. GRANT.

[To Mrs. Cramer. General Grant was then writing his _Memoirs_. Dr. Cramer was United States Minister to Switzerland from 1881 to 1885. Simpson is U.S. Grant, son of Orvil Grant. Reference is made to the customary resignation of diplomatic officials of the party opposed to the incoming political party. Cleveland became President in 1885.]

New York City, Jan'y 13th, 1885.

DEAR SISTER:

I am just in receipt of Jennie's letter of the 2nd of January. I am busy on my book which Fred is copying for the press. I hope to have it ready for the press by May next. But I may fail in this on account of weakness. My mouth has been very sore, but not so bad I think as the papers have made out. But it has been bad enough. The rest of the family are all well.

My advice is that Mr. Cramer does not resign until he is asked to. Simpson I do not suppose will be disturbed in his position. He is very competent, and the soul of honor, both qualities wanted in the Sub-treasury.

All send love.

Yours affectionately,

U.S. GRANT.

PROCLAMATION TO THE CITIZENS OF PADUCAH!

I have come among you, not as an enemy, but as your friend and fellow-citizen, not to injure or annoy you, but to respect the rights, and to defend and enforce the rights of all loyal citizens. An enemy, in rebellion against our common Government, has taken possession of, and planted its guns upon the soil of Kentucky and fired upon our flag. Hickman and Columbus are in his hands. He is moving upon your city. I am here to defend you against this enemy and to assert and maintain the authority and sovereignty of your Government and mine. I have nothing to do with opinions. I shall deal only with armed rebellion and its aiders and abettors.

You can pursue your usual avocations without fear or hindrance. The strong arm of the Government is here to protect its friends, and to punish only its enemies. Whenever it is manifest that you are able to defend yourselves, to maintain the authority of your Government, and protect the rights of all its loyal citizens, I shall withdraw the forces under my command from your city.

U.S. GRANT, _Brig-Gen. U.S.A., Commanding._

PADUCAH, Sept. 6th, 1861.

[The following letter is from the secretary of General Grant's aunt, the Aunt Rachel referred to on page twenty-seven. It is included in this volume as a historical curiosity.]

Chestnut Hill, Va., June 5th, 1861.

MISS GRANT:

I have not often written to "incog." correspondents, nor should I have the presumption now to address you, unknown to me (unless by reputation), but that peculiar circumstances have so combined as to induce the experiment. Your Aunt, Mrs. Tompkins, has been prostrated by illness for many days, and, for a while, closely confined to her couch; thus rendering it at least inconvenient to respond to your elaborate epistle, and, having permitted me the pleasure (?) of its perusal, she requested me to act as her Amanuensis. In compliance, then, with her desire I shall proceed "ex abrupto" to discuss the various points you have presented; hoping you will pardon whatever of presumption there attaches to me in taking up a gauntlet thrown _not directly_ at my own feet.

First, then, you deplore the deep distress that pervades our land, in anticipation of a conflict such as the civilized world never witnessed, and even the annals of barbarous history scarce re^cd; together with the inevitable consequence, that, our once (though _many years ago_) happy Union must be _for ever dissolved_. Viewing it from our standpoint I unite my voice of lamentation with yours; for it seems truly a mournful sight to behold, spread out to the gaze of the world, the history of a nation's folly, written in letters of blood. But I look at the brighter side of this distorted photograph. With the eye of _faith_ at least I can discern the hand of _Providence_ shifting the scenes. This may seem strange, that a partition wall should be erected in the Temple of Liberty, once an asylum for an oppressed world. That the "Stars and Stripes"--the (once) badge of freedom, gracing the bosom of every sea--should be riddled from its staff and another substituted in its stead. Not less strange, however, did thousands of good Englishmen deem it, to behold the proud "British Lion" quail before his foe of "the wilderness," and the "Magna Charta" rent in twain. We must look upon it then as an exercise of God's retributive justice for our Sins as a people, or, that He designs that He shall ultimately be the more glorified by the separation. In the former case of course I take it that the _North_ will receive the awful visitation, for although offences must needs come, yet, woe be unto him through whom they come! In the latter condition the South is destined to become what (& indeed far more than) the whole America _once_ was to the world. This Government was far too large to prosper well for many years; or at least comp^d to England (prosper), France and Spain, & Russia itself; but especially should we be divided into 2 great gov's since we have _virtually been so_, as to our domestic institutions, and many of our social customs, for many, many years. It is true we did exist many years also in commercial and social prosperity, & might have continued to maintain such a happy condition had not the "green-eyed monster, jealousy, reared his horrid front." Yes, it was in great part _jealousy_. You yourself have admitted (& rightly) that our great Ancestors were wiser than we. Well when they formed the _Original Confed^y_ they were the Rep's[3] of _Slave States_, with _one exception_. They did not deem it _wrong_ in itself, or they would have abolished it--at least would not have made the "Fugitive S. Law" _for its protection_. After a while, however, it _did not pay_ to keep Slavery in Northern climates, & it was abolished _instanter_. Why then was it that it became such a monstrous crime in their eyes? Wherein was the consistency? Partisans became jealous of the wealth & power of Southern planters & South^n politicians, elevated to their power _through their wealth_--a thing _unavoidable_ in a Republican government. Thus, through demagogues at the North an animosity was aroused. It slumbered long in the germ, but being assiduously cherished from year to year it at last budded and bloomed in a clime congenial to its nature, & is now bringing forth its venomous fruit, even to a "hundred fold." It was the consuming of this pernicious fruit that brought death upon our "Body Politic" and produced all our woe. Would to God that woe should fall upon none but those who "planted & watered" it! I am perfectly conscious and cognizant of the manner in which this spirit of enmity has been fostered. I am a _Northern_ by _birth_ and _education_, & can testify to that which I know. I have also been in the _South_ sufficiently long to _know_ the sentiments of the people here, and how they coincide (or rather disagree) with the _Northern conceptions_ of them. I have spent almost 8 years here--certainly long enough to learn the _character_ of the "peculiar institution" as well as its _practical workings & effect_ on society. And as I came with somewhat of prejudice against it, you must be frank enough to acknowledge me a fair judge in the matter. Among the first books put into my youthful library, was a work called _Charles Ball_, or _The Trials of a Run-Away Slave_. This was a horrid thing, and formed an impression on my young mind that has only with the utmost _difficulty_ been eradicated. I am conscious that its contents are false. About the same time, & repeatedly, I was taken to witness a panorama of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_--another book whose leaves have furnished much fuel to infernal flames. At the same time, & ever since, I have had my ears grated with the harsh jargon of fanatical tirades against the institutions & people of the South. Of course then my mind was _poisoned & prejudiced_. And this has not been _my_ political training alone but that of a majority of your youth at the North--_no further_ North too than _Penna_. How then is it possible that the North can entertain amicable feelings toward the South? Add to this, what you rightly remark, that the popular mind is continually influenced by the issues of the _Press_--an instrument that has scattered the seeds of discord broadcast over the land. And here you either ignorantly or designedly intimate a slander against the South. You say "all papers have free issue at the _North & not_ so at the _South_." Now do you not know enough of Southern affairs to see that the South by their _very Constitution_ cannot admit _incendiary_ documents to be cast into their midst--it were suicidal. If the South should publish papers uttering sentiments detrimental to Northern manufactories (_in general_) & in favor of foreign manufac's, how long would the North permit such papers to pass into their territory? Again, just as you say you "wish that North^n. papers could circulate South," so also _do I wish_ that I need not _bar my doors of nights_. And both our desires could be accomplished if _all men were honest_. But, first, as I can't expect robbers to pass by my unbarred treasury, so I can't expect to receive Northern papers uncrammed with _incendiary items_. Again, however, the South^n papers have _virtually_ no circulation at the North. I have heard men, reputable for their knowledge & conservatism even, denounce such Publi^ns.[4] as "unworthy to be touched." In the Reading Room of Princeton Theo. Seminary there were taken, last winter, 12 weekly papers, and about 8 periodicals from the South & scarcely 3 of these were touched by _any but Southern Students_ during the Session, unless some exciting discussion were going on in their columns. Thus much as to newspapers. I confess they have been the cause of many erroneous impressions on both sides, but the North is no purer from crimination on this score than the South;--one stubborn evidence of this is the numerical dif. in pop^ln.[5]

You next remark that Abolitionism does not predominate at the North. I admit that for many years it _did not_, but lately it has acquired an ascendency & is now wielding its baneful influence on the minds of the masses. It is true there are many good people there whose minds are too pure to be tainted by such an almost infidel spirit as pervades the breasts of Abolitionists; yet the party in power has been elevated by such vast majorities of the people, _in that section_, that, to one investigating the matter, it seems the public sentiment at the North has greatly changed in the last few years. In such a country as ours--a democratic one--the masses are governed by a few great leaders; these leaders, whether in power or not, are still the almost despots who rule us. Their actions give fruit and coloring to the character of the sections over which they sway their autocratic sceptres. Who then can doubt the Aboli^n propensities of the N. when such men as _Beecher, Greeley, Webb, Phillips, Sumner_, & a host of kindred spirits, are the giant levers in the machinery of their society? It will not do to say that these are disregarded by sensible people there, for I know too well their power for evil. I know that _Dr. Hodge_--a man whom I love next to my Father--stated, in his article on "the state of the Country," that he did not know of 12 abolitionists "within the circle of his acquaintance." But the Dr. was either woefully mistaken or he didn't consider his _pupils as belonging to that circle_; for to my certain knowledge there were twice that number within the walls of "Princeton" at the time he made the assertion, and many of these avowedly such--men who, I was astonished to see, withheld their names when the same Dr. H. came round with a petition to Congress for "the restoration of the Mis. Comp." & the repeal of the "Personal Liberty Bills." These young men were embryo Ministers--men whose moral influence _must_ be _powerful_ for _good_ or for _evil_. How is it then you can assert that the North don't want the extinction of slavery when such men as I have mentioned exert every effort to prevent its extension & not that only, but the _operation_ of the _fugitive S. law?_ I am aware that you stated the _contrary_ in your letter--that the North are ever "rigorous" in its execution; nor am I so ungallant as to doubt your veracity; but I think you have not fully informed yourself on this point, else you would have learned that in scarcely an isolated case has the Master ever recovered his property without being put to more expense & trouble than the negro was worth; although I am free to admit, that at the same time it cost the U.S. gov. an equal if not greater Amount. Of course I refer to those negroes who have _not merely_ crossed the _limits_ of a Slave State, & thus been caught, but gone some distance North. Now the obligation to restore a fugitive Slave is a _constitu^l. & moral obligation;_ and those laws designed to prevent such restoration are unconst^l & criminal--and worthy of all condem^n.--and unbecoming the dignity of any Sov^n. State. If people of any State can't conscientiously submit to the Constitution there are only 2 courses: they should endeavor to have it peaceably altered, or should _move out of the Country_. This is the opinion of the most learned and liberal men. _They have no right_ to live under the protec^n. of a Const^n. & yet _refuse_ to submit to its _stipulations_. True enough, as you say, the North wish _not_ to have the Negroes set free _in their midst_, to overrun and disturb them--this they declare by their actions, for they take no care for or interest in the poor free (almost) brutes in their midst;--yet how soon will they be ready to _resist_ you most violently should you attempt to take even one of them back, from his then wretched abode, to his former happier place in the service of a kind Master? "Oh! consistency, thou art a jewel!" This then has been _one_ of the _two great causes_ of the present troubles. The other--the denial of equal rights in the Territories--is still a _greater_, because it involves a principle; the former was more a matter of personal interest. The territories being purchased in common, were the com. pos. of North and South. Each had a Const^l right to emigrate thither _with their property_ & demand for it the protection _afforded by_ the Const^n. It became, in course of time, a matter of dispute whether the South could take their slaves there as _property_. (As a matter of course this arose from _jealousy_--the N. having no such prop, to take.) This great quest. was decided, however, by the _Chief Justice_ in the highest Tribunal in the world, in favor of the South; viz. that _slaves were property_. I refer to the "Dred Scott" Case. This should have been sufficient, as it came from the highest authority in the Gov^t. But some parties and people are _never satisfied_. Full in the face of this high official the Repub^n Party declare by their _Platform orators, & Press_, that slavery shall never enter another foot of territory. Now if the South admit this principle they acknowledge their inferiority to the North--an act that, even in the eyes of the North, would not comport with their dignity & honor as an independent & free people. The South being thus _oppressed_ then I assert they have a right (not to secede, for no such right exists in my conception, as it would be an element _subversive_ of any, & especially of a Repub^ln gov.,) _to revolt_--a right inherent in & beyond the control of all earthly govern^ts. Yes I coincide with the great Lord Chatham when he says that "_Rebellion_ against _oppression_ is _obedience_ to _God_." Our Ancestors rebelled against the tyranny of British usurpation, & the Texans revolted against a like despotism exercised by a Mexican Autocrat. Why then are the _Sovereign_ States of _America_ not justifiable in throwing off the yoke or rather resisting _to have put upon them_, the yoke, of Northern Tyranny? To make the argument still clearer, however, as to the Territories, let us illustrate it: Suppose a Repub^n. Congress decides that slavery shan't be _protected_ in the _Ter._ as _prop_. I take my slave thither. An indictment is brought against me. I am tried and condemned by the territorial court. I appeal from its decision to the Sup. Court of the U.S. What then? From _analogy_ I conclude that I shall be acquitted, i.e., recover my property. For one Chief Justice has already decided thus; and is not his decision final? Here then is an end of the matter; since the Sup. Court is the Sole Arbiter in determining the _Constitutionality_ of any of Congress' acts.

As to the North not making use of _slanderous epithets_ against the South, I know nothing about _your particular section_ of the North, but I do know that when I have been in Penna. & N.J., I have heard all classes utter the vilest insinuations against the people of the South _indiscriminately_. Yes, it often seemed as if they could find no language too harsh, no comparison too base, no denunciation too bitter to apply to those whom in their ignorance they deemed their inferiors in wisdom and sense. Such have I heard from the lips of distinguished citizens in all departments & professions of life. Even hoary-headed ministers have entered the sacred desk with their MSS. reeking with filth from the cesspool of political slander. Dr. Brown, with whom you are doubtless acqu^td, is now in Phila^d. at the Gen. Assem. of the Pres. Ch. He wrote home lately that he never saw a mob that made use of viler language than did the best of citizens there in their denouncings of the South. I confess, however, that this is not a _one-sided_ affair; for I have heard equally abusive language applied to the North by the people South. As before, then, let us "strike hands" on this point also, for both sections are equally culpable. As to the _strength_ of _individuals_ in the two sections, it must be tested on the battle-field, and there alone. Our war of words can never decide anything on this point. I should be sorry to admit the men in the North could not fight, had they a real enemy to contend against--a war of "_justice, reason_, or _humanity_" to wage. But to arm themselves against their brethren, and in such an unholy cause as that in which they are engaged now, I must confess that their true metal can never be exhibited. _One_ man whose heart is in the war can always conquer _two_ who are fighting from some _impure motive_. And now let me candidly ask you to as candidly tell me whether or not you _think_ after _seeing_ the thing progress thus far, and having, as you say, been, & still continue to be, well-informed as to apper^ns on _both sides_, the North are engaged in the cause of "Justice." Admitting that some of them are actuated by pure and lofty motives, do you not acknowledge that the _vast majority_ are _blinded_ by _prejudice, led on_ by a desire for _military fame_, prompted by the _prospect_ of _plunder_, or actuated by the still more ----? but I refrain--my very pen shudders at the thought of expressing myself further. Yes, I think you must confess that is the case. I refer, of course, to the Armies of Lincoln _thus far_ made up. Are they not composed of a _Mercenary horde_, made up generally of the lowest rabble of the Country, & thousands of those thrown out of employment in the manufacturing cities--who have resorted to camp-life for self-sustenance--indeed _their only resource?_ Whether you admit this or not, it is emphatically true to a great extent, for the Northern papers themselves have made such statements as would lead me to believe so, & more, I have correspondents in the North, who confirm my suspicions on this score. My own Father who does not justify the attack on Sumter, yet denounces Lin's army as a set of _Murderers!_ He lives in Penna. & this is the opinion of many good citizens there. And now can such men be justified in their present purposes and activities? If so, upon what principles? We have sh^n. that it is not in accordance with sound reason & the "inexorable logic" of the Constitution, since that noble edifice was attacked in two points simultaneously by the Repub^cn party: 1°. by abrogating the Fugitive Slave Law; 2°. by depriving the South of eq^l rights in the Territories. These are 2 points in which the North has transgressed the limits of immutable Justice, and nothing which is unjust can be _reasonable_, for, they (Just. & Reas.) are twin sisters. Moreover, the Bible justifies no war but that of self-defence. Then are the North invaded? No, nor never will be, by the South, for all they ask is peace within their borders. While they hold in one hand the sword of self-defence, they present the "Olive Branch" with the other; and so God grant it _may be ever_.

You lament the inconceivable disasters "inaugurated by the attack on Sumter." True enough they may have been _inaugurated_ by that _act_, but their unconcealed cause lies _far_ back of that, as we have shown. That was only a raising of the curtain, or rather a forcing of it to be raised by the Abolitionists--a beginning of the bloody drama. Who caused the attack? What meant those _human cargoes_ that approached so close to its walls the day before the battle? Why did the worthy (?) Lincoln so long deceive the South^rn Commissioners by promise after promise not to make war, but to _evacuate_ the fort, & meet them, as a sensible Pres. would have done, in friendly negotiation for peace? S.C. was right, and acted nobly in the affair, and was as justifiable therein, as was _Anderson_ in occupying the Fort _before_ he had a reason for doing so, declaring by his overt act that the U.S. forces under him were at _enmity_ with S.C. But then you say S.C. should have _first tried_ Lincoln before determining to secede. I think she saw with prophetic vision the end from the beginning. She took Lincoln at his word--that itself was oppression & tyranny sufficient to burst asunder the closest ties of Union that could exist in any Country. You say we sh^d. give everything a fair trial. I disagree. If I saw a _serpent_ in my path & it sh^d. attempt to make battle, or declare its hostility by displaying its horrid fangs, do you think I would coolly stand by & give it a fair trial, & test its friendship? I would be impelled, even had I never seen or heard of such a creature before, to crush it immediately, & so S.C. has sensibly said to the Administration "_Serpent, bite a file!_" As to your Eulogium on Lincoln I have not much to say. If he pleases you, well enough, you're easily satisfied. _I_ take it that he is a disgrace to the Chair he occupies; and to judge from his conversations, he is devoid of all sense of refinement & etiquette; to look at his executive powers as displayed thus far, he had better be _a Bey_ than helmsman of the "Old Ship"; and what of his _efforts_ at speeches? In the language of Logan, "I appeal to any white man" to say if they would not be a disgrace to many a "Country 'Squire"! And yet such a man elevated to the highest position in the gift of the American people! There was a time when the soundest and most learned men of the land were made Presidents, now a man's capacity for the office seems to depend on the meanness of his intellect & the _number of rails he can split in a day_. And so great were his "maul & wedge" propensities that he withheld not his hand from splitting the Tree of Liberty. But let us inquire upon which side "_humanity_" stands in this contest. You complain much of several (local) depredations com^td by South on private _boats_ &c. I ask, in candor, if it was not in retaliation for like outrages com^td by the North. I am certain as to its being so in several cases. The very 1st boat thus ill-treated was one belonging to the South on its way down the Miss. & attacked at Cairo. To retaliate they determined to attack _North^en boats coming up the river_. And what have your noble _Ohioans_ done lately & repeatedly with our _Ka._ boats at _Gallipolis_? Thrice have they overhauled the same boat and twice kept every pound of freight on her timbers. But this is not all; your _humane Lincoln_ has closed the Southern ports, & is daily _robbing vessels_ on their way in & out of the same. During the last week he stole $150,000 worth of Southern Tobacco, & thus the programme continues. _Very humane indeed!_ Again, he is _no invader!_ No indeed! by no means! yet hundreds of Citizens are now fleeing from Wheeling, & other towns invaded, for personal safety. Scarce a day passes but some one stops here who has thus escaped. If they remain on their own soil and round their proper hearthstone the (very) humane doom of a murderer awaits them! The North don't intend to make invasion at all, yet _4000 F^l_ troops are now in _Parkersburg_, breaking up printing presses, putting innocent people in jail, and doing other _humane_ acts, "too numerous to mention." According to my letter from Father I understand they don't have the first principles of _Civilized warfare_--they intend to _hang_ all their prisoners. Oh! _humanity!_ HUMANITY!

And now that we have seen that neither Reason, Justice, nor Humanity is on the side of the North, let us look at the subject in the light of _Expediency_, admitting, for the sake of argument the while, that it _were_ right or just to wage the war. And viewing it from this standpoint, we ask, what does the North expect to _gain_ by it? Does there live a man so lost to reason & common sense as to imagine that the Union of the seceded States with the N.S. can ever be effected again? _And if it could be done by force_, how long could a Repub^n Gov. exist as a military despotism? And who would not prefer _banishment_ or _death_ to _such_ a _life?_ What Satisfac^n could the North themselves have in such an event? They would live a life of misery; provoke the sneers of the civilized world; and draw down upon their heads the terrible wrath of an offended God.

But this war will _not_ be permitted _thus to terminate_, the South can _never be conquered_. You yourself know their "_spirit_" too well to believe otherwise. Rather than be _subjugated_ they will _die_ a _triple death_. Like their mighty _Henry_ they cry, "Give us liberty or give us _death!_" And still more _I_ don't think they can be _exterminated. 8,000,000_ of people, armed in the holy cause of self-defence; struggling for their _liberties, honor, interests, & lives_, with a laudable ambition, & an _unyielding perseverance_, are _invincible_ by any force the North can raise to send against them. Besides (to continue the sentiments of Henry), the battle is not to the _strong_ alone, it is to the _vigilant, the active_, the _brave_. Especially so when, as I said before, the forces of Lincoln are not composed generally of men of the first rank of Society (except a few Officers desirous of Fame), but the "offscouring" & rabble of the land--men who have nothing at stake, not even their own lives we might say, since they care so little for anything. So that notwithstanding the immense number (and here let me remind you of the _disparity_ of _forces_, of which you said so much, at _Sumter_)--"stubborn facts"--of which you speak, the South has nothing to fear. And, moreover, as certainly as I believe there exists a God of Justice & Mercy, so certainly & conscientiously do I believe He will defend the South from the Vandals of the North. Yes, dark as they seem, the clouds of gloom do not shut out the star of hope, and they are beginning to be spanned by a radiant bow of promise; the fall of _Ellsworth_ & the shattered walls of the _once presumed impreg^ble_ Sumter, abundantly testify that _God_ is on their side, and "if the Lord be _for_ them, _who can be against_ them?" So I heartily say "God speed" them--they shall have my prayers.--But let us take one more glance at the _expediency_ of this matter. Are not the North fighting for a Patroclus' grave in this struggle? What matters an _abstract banner?_ especially to the _"matter of fact" Yankee?_ And then behold the inconsistency of the North in another point; they have through their Representatives, for many years, cried "_no more slave_ territory"; and indeed many of them, such as Seward &c., have declared that slavery _must be abolished_, as both can't exist under the _same gov.;_ yet, _now_ they are _fighting to the death_ to _keep_ or _get back slave territory!!!_ "Oh! consistency!" And, _finally_, at this point, will it not cost _myriads_ of _lives & millions_ of _money_ to accomplish their infernal designs, even _could_ they do it? And can the North afford this? Even now it is costing _Lincoln's Anarchy_ (for I can't call it _gov._) _$1,000,000_ per day--a _matter_ of _record!_ Suppose then the war sh^d last a year, what then? Union or dis-union? Alas, _farther separation_. Continue it then two years more. What then? _Ditto & ditto_ it will _be_ should it last as long as the "_War of the Roses_," for we have no houses of York & Lancaster to _unite_, sign and settle the dispute by marriage--_one_ or _both_ annihilated!--And now I ask how, in the name of Reason, Justice, or Humanity, can you lift up your voice in defence of the North when they are the cause of all this accumulating misery?--when they have deprived the South of her Consti^tn rights, driven her to the necessity of a separation, and now raise their arm against her as an enemy, declaring either to subjugate her, to overrun her with their vandal hordes, or exterminate from her soil every living creature?--& when, "Oh bloodiest picture in the book of time!" they are ready to repeat with a triple vengeance the untold horrors of the Spanish Inquisition? They are madly, blindly rushing, they know not where. The blame of dissolution rests upon her. And the still more awful responsibility of a civil war will hang as an everlasting incubus upon her shoulders. Then let her beware ere she "_cross the Rubicon_"--let her "pause long upon its brink." And shall we all perish by her fratricidal hand? Shall the blood, shed by brother in deadly war with brother, flow ignominiously through our rivers to the ocean & be carried by its waves to stain the shores of Nations that for long years have been centring their fond hopes on America as the _grand ideal_ of the gov. they too would some day enjoy? Shall such hopes be blasted as soon as fondly cherished? and now that Italy has trampled upon the tyrannical "Mitre"--torn from her long subdued neck the yoke of Papal bondage--passed from the darkness of superstitious bondage into the light of religious freedom, shall we sink back to what she was, by casting ourselves into the whirlpool of civil war? Shall we not only put out, but shatter, the lamp of liberty, a lamp whose effulgence was beginning to scatter the shades of despotism from off the earth? Shall we extinguish the brightest star in the constellation of human freedom? The united voices of Humanity, Justice, & Reason answer, _No!_ The cries of myriad free men living, & of millions yet unborn, rend the air with a universal negative! and from the vaulted canopy of heaven there swells back the solemn echo, "_God forbid!_" As if augmented by the mournful strain of 10,000 angels hovering in amazement over the conflicting scene! _Oh! then let the North beware!_

Mrs. Tompkins says that if _you_ can justify your Bro. Ulysses in drawing his sword against those connected by the ties of blood, and even boast of it, you are at liberty to do so, _but she can not_. And should one of those kindred be stricken down by his sword the awful judgment of God will be meted out to him, &, if not repented of, the hot thunderbolts of His wrath will blaze round his soul through eternity. On the contrary, if the _vice versa_ should occur, she thinks "those kin" would be justified, because in _self-defence_. As to Mr. _John Marshall's_ being _promoted_ in the army of Lincoln, she thinks _that fact explains itself:_ he spent much of his time _previously_ seeking, or at least _expecting, promotion_, & failing in a _laudable way_,--in defence of his own kindred & the home of his bosom companion!--he resorted to _Yankeedom_, and sold as it were his birthright for a mess of Abolition pottage. This helps confirm my view, that many take positions in Lincoln's Army with the expectation of military promotion, & the hope of an easy conquest of the South. Oh, how deluded! But as for many of them, "God forgive them, for they _know not what they do_."

But I must bring these desultory remarks to a break-off. So, begging pardon once more for transgressing the limits of formality, and hoping you may live to see the verification of many of my remarks, I have the pleasure of signing myself

THE SECRETARY OF YOUR AUNT RACHEL

P.S. If you sh^d write again, please use white paper; it almost gives me the "blues" to read your letter.

[Footnote 3: Representatives.]

[Footnote 4: Publications.]

[Footnote 5: Population.]