Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 03.djvu/184

 and an abolition of slavery. If this could be done, they seemed to feel little care for the distress and suffering of the beaten party. Mr. Lincoln, it is true, said that a politician on his side had declared that $400,000,000 ought to be given by way of compensation to the slaveholders, and in this opinion he expressed his concurrence. Upon this Mr. Seward exhibited some impatience and got up to walk across the floor, exclaiming, as he moved, that in his opinion the United States had done enough in expending so much money on the war for the abolition of slavery, and had suffered enough in enduring the losses necessary to "carry on the war." "Ah, Mr. Seward," said Mr. Lincoln, "you may talk so about slavery, if you will; but if it was wrong in the South to hold slaves, it was wrong in the North to carry on the slave trade and sell them to the South (as it is notorious that they did, he might have added), and to have held on to the money thus procured without compensation, if the slaves were to be taken by them again." Mr. Lincoln said, however, that he was not authorized to make such a proposition, nor did he make it. It was evident that both the President and Secretary were afraid of the extreme men of their party. Certain objects were to be secured, and when once obtained it was no consideration with their party whether the sufferings of the conquered party were to be mitigated or any relief was to be afforded. And yet to statesmen and benevolent men, it was obvious that both parties were to be benefited by affording the conquered party some relief for their prostration. The reaction of the sufferings of the South upon the North has been obvious enough for many years. The English Government in its scheme of West India emancipation saw the necessity of some relief to all parts of the country. It ought to have been obvious enough to wise and considerate statesmen that some relief was the policy here, too. But the North, when placed in power, seemed to be insensible to these views, and desired to punish those who had been defeated in the contest. To do this they seemed willing to make their losses irretrievable.

The armistice was promptly opposed by the President and Secretary of State. If the only objects were to re-establish the Union and abolish slavery, they were right. If, however, they had any desire for the general good, and to procure relief for parties suffering, as ought to have been felt by men fit to govern such a country and to understand its wants, their views would have been different.