outh, whose votes are recorded upon
national legislation. Railroads do not break bulk between North and
South. Interstate commerce goes on unvexed between the one and the
other. The Post-office department distributes its mail with impartiality
on each side of Mason's and Dixon's Line. Prosperity in the North is
accompanied by prosperity in the South, and a halt in the one means a
halt in the other. Northern people meet Southern people, and find them
friendly and charming and full of graceful and grateful companionship.

What is it that sets the South apart and takes from the Southern people
the responsibilities which the members of a republic ought to share in
respect to the conduct of the National Government? Why is it that what
is done at Washington seems to be the work of the North and the West,
and not of the South? Should this state of affairs continue? These are
the questions that force themselves on those of us concerned with the
Government and who are most anxious to have a solid, united country, of
whose will the course of the Government shall be an intelligent
interpretation and expression.

We can answer these questions as the historian would, and we can explain
the situation as it is; but I don't think we can justify or excuse a
continuance of it. Looking back into the past, of course, the
explanation of the difference between the South and the other two
sections was in the institution of slavery. It is of no purpose to point
out that early in the history of the country the North was as
responsible for bringing slaves here as the South. We are not concerned
with whose fault it was that there was such an institution as slavery.
Nor are we concerned with the probability that, had the Northerners been
interested in slaves, they would have viewed the institution exactly as
the Southerners viewed it and would have fought to defend it because as
sacred as the institution of private property itself. It is sufficient
to say, as I think we all now realize, that the institution of slavery
was a bad thing and that it is a good thing to have got rid of it. It
doesn't help in the slightest degree in the present day to stir up the
embers of the controversy of the past by attempting to fix blame on one
part of the country or the other, in respect to an institution which has
gone, and happily gone, on the one hand, or in respect to the
consequences of that institution which we still have with us, on the
other. These conseq