FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514  
515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   >>   >|  
said, it is identical with it, rather than a result from it. In the same publication we find the following: "Previously to our Revolution, when the arm of oppression was stretched over New England, where did our Northern brethren meet with a braver sympathy than that which sprung from the bosoms of Carolinians? We had no extortion, no oppression, no collision with the king's ministers, no navigation interests springing up, in envious rivalry of England." This seems extraordinary language. South Carolina no collision with the king's ministers in 1775! No extortion! No oppression! But, Sir, it is also most significant language. Does any man doubt the purpose for which it was penned? Can anyone fail to see that it was designed to raise in the reader's mind the question, whether, _at this time_,--that is to say, in 1828,--South Carolina has any collision with the king's ministers, any oppression, or extortion, to fear from England? whether, in short, England is not as naturally the friend of South Carolina as New England, with her navigation interests springing up in envious rivalry of England? Is it not strange, Sir, that an intelligent man in South Carolina, in 1828, should thus labor to prove that, in 1775, there was no hostility, no cause of war, between South Carolina and England? That she had no occasion, in reference to her own interest, or from a regard to her own welfare, to take up arms in the Revolutionary contest? Can any one account for the expression of such strange sentiments, and their circulation through the State, otherwise than by supposing the object to be what I have already intimated, to raise the question, if they had no "_collision_" (mark the expression) with the ministers of King George the Third, in 1775, what _collision_ have they, in 1828, with the ministers of King George the Fourth? What is there now, in the existing state of things, to separate Carolina from _Old_, more, or rather, than from _New_ England? Resolutions, Sir, have been recently passed by the legislature of South Carolina. I need not refer to them; they go no farther than the honorable gentleman himself has gone, and I hope not so far. I content myself, therefore, with debating the matter with him. And now, Sir, what I have first to say on this subject is, that at no time, and under no circumstances, has New England, or any State in New England, or any respectable body of persons in New England, or any public man of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501   502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   513   514  
515   516   517   518   519   520   521   522   523   524   525   526   527   528   529   530   531   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

England

 

Carolina

 

collision

 

ministers

 

oppression

 

extortion

 

language

 
question
 

George

 

rivalry


expression

 
envious
 

strange

 

interests

 
navigation
 

springing

 

object

 

circulation

 

supposing

 
public

sentiments
 

intimated

 

account

 
content
 

gentleman

 

respectable

 

subject

 
circumstances
 
debating
 

matter


honorable

 

farther

 

Resolutions

 
separate
 

things

 

existing

 

recently

 

legislature

 

passed

 

persons


contest

 

Fourth

 

sympathy

 

sprung

 

bosoms

 

braver

 

Northern

 

brethren

 

Carolinians

 

significant