Confederate Military History. Jabez Lamar Monroe Curry
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Confederate Military History - Jabez Lamar Monroe Curry страница 20

СКАЧАТЬ the cause of patriots. He must be candid, for a partisan work will not live in history, and will fail to convince the world.’ * * ‘He must be bold and fearless, but always liberal. He must be eloquent, for he is dealing with a lofty theme—the most gigantic internal struggle which history records—the grandest contribution which the nineteenth century has made to human greatness—America's proudest title to martial glory. He is painting for future ages the picture of that eventful epoch, whose memories are the joint heritage of all Americans, and which is destined to occupy in American history the pathetic place which the Wars of the Roses now occupy in the annals of England, and in the hearts of Englishmen.’ Such are the sentiments expressed by Confederate soldiers. Has the great centripetal force, the sentiment of American brotherhood, the love for the American system of government, and confidence in American institutions, yet lost its power over the hearts of the American people?

      There is one irritating cause, too petty to exert any controlling influence, but which tends to keep alive passions which war and political strife have failed to perpetuate. A class of partisan writers have attempted to ignore the South as a factor in American institutions, and persist in representing the Southern section as inferior or hostile to the other sections, and have even stained the page of history by false pictures of its people, representing them as drones in the national hive, ungrateful participants in the blessings which other sections have conferred. Such writers deserve rebuke at the North as well as at the South. Their partisan coloring fades in the light of facts. The patriot who loves his country is just to all its sections, and finds in its history abundant reason to rejoice that each factor has performed a distinctive part in its upbuilding.

      The above digression, it is hoped, will indicate to the reader that a cordial admiration for the joint work of all the sections in building the greatest nation of the world, is in harmony with an analysis of the distinctive work of each.

      A calm review of the development of the United States cannot fail to disclose to the candid mind that the South was the leading factor in promoting the territorial expansion, at each period of acquisition, unless the acquisition of Alaska be excepted.

      This discussion must be sectional, as it is written in vindication of a particular section; it must also be national, since it deals with that section as one of the factors of the nation; it must be patriotic as well, for it relates the history of patriotic devotion and sacrifice. If any apology were needed, it would be found in the fact that this distinctive work of the South, although no new discovery, has not received due recognition. This is not surprising. The sections whose genius has made them leaders in commerce, manufactures and internal improvements, while contributing to the greatness of the whole country, have in the same work built up their own wealth. The evidences are visible on their soil, and attract the eye of the observer. They may be verified in statistics, population, products and tax lists. The results of the Southern policy of territorial expansion have accrued to the whole country, but have left no mark or memento on Southern soil. The controversies to which the organization of the several territorial acquisitions has given rise, have been mingled with collateral questions, leading to the slavery agitation, and culminating in the Civil war.

      These collateral questions have been of such immediate and absorbing interest as to divert attention from the due consideration of the causes and effects of the several acquisitions. Discussion has been directed rather to the contests which arose over the assimilation of the territory acquired, its organization into States, and the relations of the new States to the contending political parties. In the contest for control of the acquired territory, the South was outstripped in the race, and its agency in the acquisition has been ignored. Let us now consider each acquisition in chronological order.

      Chapter 2

      The consideration of this subject involves a discussion of the title of all claimants to the territory between the Alleghany mountains and the Mississippi river from the Florida line to the Great Lakes, and the final cession to the United States of all this territory, except Kentucky, which was erected into an independent state by consent of Virginia. There were three distinct classes of claimants.

      First.—The charter claimants:

      Second.—Claimants by virtue of alleged grants or purchases from the Indians.

      Third.—Foreign claimants.

      There was, also, a class of indirect claimants who urged the United States to set up a claim of original right to the jurisdiction and soil of this entire region.

      It was urged that the United States ought to seize this entire country as the property of the general government; that this territory, ‘if secured by the blood and treasure of all the States, ought in reason, justice and policy to be considered a common stock.’ This agrarian argument aroused the indignation of the charter claimants and threatened to prevent the formation of the Union. Congress, however, was not deceived by the fallacy, and acted with wisdom and justice. By no act or declaration, under the Continental Congress, or under the Confederation, or under the Constitution, did the United States ever assert such a claim, or sanction the policy of spoliation. Since the United States never appeared as a claimant, the consideration of such claims might be dismissed, were it not for the fact that the persistence with which they were urged upon Congress by outside parties has made the controversy historic, and led to important results. It will, therefore, be necessary at the proper place to trace the origin, progress and final defeat of an effort which, if it had been successful, would either have prevented the Union or would have engrafted upon its fundamental law a pernicious and fatal doctrine.

      The charter claimants were six in number: Virginia, Massachusetts, Connecticut, the two Carolinas and Georgia. Their several charters constituted the only legal and valid titles to any portion of this western country. Their conduct was eminently wise and patriotic through the whole controversy. They engaged in no unseemly squabbles, and met with dignity the noise that was made by those who had neither legal title nor equitable rights. They ended the controversy by the patriotic cession of the whole country to the United States.

      Virginia claimed the whole territory from her southern boundary line extending to the Mississippi and up northward to the Great Lakes, including Kentucky and all the country which afterward became the Northwest Territory. This claim was based upon her charter of 1609, and upheld by actual possession and by civil and military occupation. She remained in actual possession until the country was ceded to the United States. Her claim was undisputed by any charter claimant as far north as the 41st parallel.

      Massachusetts and Connecticut claimed that their charters extended westward to the Mississippi, covering the narrow belts running across the territory in possession of Virginia, and embraced in the westward extension of their respective northern and southern boundary lines. Neither of these States had ever occupied any portion of the territory up to the time of the cessions, and neither made any attempt to occupy it. Had either of them desired to test their claims, the tribunal was within easy reach, to which Georgia and South Carolina referred their territorial dispute—the tribunal provided under the ninth article of the confederation. There was no necessity, however, as they all contemplated ceding their claims to the United States.

      North Carolina, alone, possessed an undisputed claim. Her western territory was co-extensive with the present State of Tennessee.

      A conflict of title between South Carolina and Georgia was submitted to Congress under the ninth article of the confederation, but was settled by friendly compromise before the court appointed by Congress was ready to begin the trial. It was decided that a strip about twelve miles wide, extending from the present limits of the State westward to the Mississippi, and running along the southern border of Tennessee, should belong to South Carolina. All south of this strip to the Florida line should belong to Georgia.

      The СКАЧАТЬ