der the war power uniformly recognized
as constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. If these
are States of our Union, or are retained by us, slavery has ceased, and
the _three millions of slaves are free_. But, if you acknowledge the
confederate independence, then, these three millions of slaves, so far
as England is concerned, are slaves still, and will remain so forever.
To refuse recognition, is to admit the freedom of these slaves--to
recognize, is to remand them to bondage, so far as England can
accomplish that purpose. Nor is this all--it is to spread slavery over
an almost boundless territory, claimed by the South. It is impossible
then to escape the conclusion, that, in recognizing this confederacy,
England ranges herself on the side of slavery, and does all she can to
maintain and perpetuate it in America. Nor is this all. She violates a
great moral rule, and a well settled principle of international law, to
maintain and perpetuate slavery in the South. By the law of nations, the
recognition of national independence is the acknowledgment of the fact
of independence. But, we have seen, that the States composing this
so-called league, are not independent, but are held, to a vast extent,
by our army and navy, including two thirds of their area. Never was
independence acknowledged under such circumstances, except as an act of
war. The acknowledgment then of the confederate independence, in the
present posture of affairs, is, in fact, _a declaration of war by
England against the United States, without cause or justification_. It
would be so universally regarded in the United States, and would
instantly _close all dissensions in the North_. If any suppose that
England, without any just cause, should thus strike us with the
iron-gauntleted hand, and that we will not resist, let the history of
the past answer the question. Nor would the union of France, in such an
act, change the result, except that nearly all the loss and sacrifice
would fall upon England. Including the slaves and free blacks, there is
not a single seceded State, in which an overwhelming majority of the
people are not for the Union. Now, by the Federal Constitution, slaves
are mentioned only three times, and then not as slaves, but as
'_persons_,' and the Supreme Court of the United States have expressly
decided that slaves, so far as regards the United States, _are persons,
and not property_. (Groves _vs._ Slaughter, 15 Peters, 392.) _A