Unionism versus Secessionism in Virginia: From Lincoln's Election to Sumter

Group Two Articles

 

The Spectator, April 2, 1861, p. 1, c. 6

Policy of the Border States.

Having steadfastly adhered to the doctrine that civil war, or danger of constant collision between the Border, Free and Slave States,could only be averted by a peaceful settlement in the Union of our present troubles, and that it was really the interest o f the Border Slave States to maintain their present relations with the Free States on our border, and with the whole Union if possible, we have deduced therefrom a difference between our condition and that of the Gulf States. Nothing that has occurred, th erefore, has served to change or even shake the conviction, that we have interests in the Union that are paramount--interests that the Cotton States have not; and that therefore we should not rashly imperil them through any fancied identity of interest wi th the States that have left us for weal or for woe, to work out our own destiny as best we may. We have maintained that it is neither our interest to go with them, nor really essential to our interest that we should.

We are glad, therefore, to find so respectable a journal in one of the seceded States, as the Milledgeville (Geo.) Recorder, supporting the views we have advocated. In the issue of that journal of the 12th inst., we find the case thus strongly stated, as follows:

"If the line of the Southern Confederacy touched that of the Free States, there being no law or treaty for the rendition of fugitives from labor between foreign Powers, the mischief would be such, practically, that a collision of arms would be unavoidable . . . . In the simple matter of convenience and expediency, therefore, we believe that the Border States will be of more advantage in their present position to the Southern Confederacy, a wall of defence against Northern aggression, than if they were to become members of it, with all their frontier exposed to fanatical hatred and pillage. . . . "
Ought not this candid avowal, from a source entitled to credit, induce the people of the Border Slave States to make every effort compatible with their honor (and we would not have them do more) to avert the catastrophe, before they rush into the vortex o f secession? . . . We trust our people will do nothing rashly.

Questions to answer 1. What is the author's stance on whether Virginia should secede?

 

 

 

2. What does the author mean when he writes that Virginia has "interests in the Union that are paramount. . . and that therefore we should not rashly imperil them through any fancied indentity to interest with the States that have left us."

 

 

 

3. What other argument does he use to support his on secession?

 

 

 

4. In the final paragraph, the author expresses hope that the people of the Border Slave States will "make every effort compatible with their honor (and we would not have them do more) to avert" secession. Under what circumstances, then, might the author abandon his opposition to secession?