Supposing the decision in Scott's case to go unquestioned, a slaveholder might bring his slaves to Boston, or any other free town, keep them there as long as he pleased, and then take them back. But, worse still, all the land governed at present by Congress, and not yet erected into States, would have had to be fought for, like Kansas, before freedom would have been tolerated.

A new party was formed to prevent the extension of slavery. They contested the presidency, and lost; Buchanan, the nominee and obsequious tool of the slave power, was elected. Nothing daunted, they strengthened themselves, and at the next election Abraham Lincoln was chosen. A moment's attention to the principles he was chosen to represent will do away with much confusion on the subject. He was in no sense elected on Abolition principles, though a moderate Abolitionist himself. Abolition was popular nowhere but in the Puritan or New England States. The party electing him, and whose views he was pledged to carry out, were the "Free Soilers." Abolitionists voted with them because they, too, believed in "free soil;" and the extreme principle Lincoln was pledged to as President was, that while the North had no right to interfere with slavery in the slave States, it had a perfect right to prevent its intrusion into the free States, and also into the territories not yet erected into States. It was not slavery they were opposed to, but its extension into other places. Hence, speaking as their organ, Lincoln said truly," he had no intention whatever of interfering with slavery." This is one of the reasons why no mention was made by Northern men of slavery in the early part of the war. Slavery was not treason, but taking Federal forts and firing on Federal soldiers was. Slavery was the cause, but Secession was the overt act. The North did not, perhaps, at first wish to put down slavery; at any rate, it was rebellion against Federal authority that stood first to fight with, and if after eighteen months of war they found there was no chance of settled peace till slavery too was destroyed; if they found out (though late) that slavery and rebellion might be more easily destroyed together than either one separate, very few Englishmen will be disposed to quarrel with them on that score. It is no presumption to say one may see in this God's own hand.

a

Here is a system potent in all its powers for evil; dehumanizing man, turning the creature God made in His own image into " chattel," a thing to be bought and sold, taking away every shred of right of man from him, filling the land systematically and daily with villanies, atrocities, and cruelty, with pollutions, sensualities, and crimes, compared with which "Sodom was clean, and Gomorrah was chaste;" then filling up the measure of its iniquity by claiming God's sanction for the unholy thing!

No wonder, grown too strong for all human correction, with the Bible in their hand, perverted to a support for their sin, their pride drove them mad, and in the vain hope by war to perpetuate slavery, they have themselves killed the abominable thing. And although

the North has suffered terribly for its unholy complicity in the growth of the past, purged and purified by suffering, they will yet conquer, leaving the deadly upas to wither root and branch.

From the Mexican isthmus to the St. Lawrence, and from the turbulent waters of the Atlantic to the shores of the vast Pacific, shall the flag of stars, purged from the stripes, float over one people, united, prosperous, and FREE.

NEGATIVE ARTICLE.-IV. '

W. R

SOME of our readers, noting our signature, may conclude that we have a predilection for negatives, but we beg to affirm that we are influenced only by convictions. We enter upon our course with a mind entirely disengaged, and we feel disposed to put upon record such sentiments as appear to us right and holy. We shall not animadvert directly upon the propositions of our antagonists, nor accompany our remarks with irritating strictures; by such a course we shall appear in opposition without giving justifiable cause of complaint.

In our opening propositions we wish to be as perspicuous as possible. Although we appear in the negative, we must here note that we do not countenance slavery; far otherwise, we would urge on the heralds of justice and humanity to proclaim the freedom of the slave under proper circumstances. We are aware of the extent to which both lay and religious governors have exerted their power to suppress and to prohibit liberty.

Were we to review the history of slavery, from the issuing of the Bull of Pope Eugenius IV. in the year 1440, we should extend our remarks far beyond endurance. Since the publication of the Bull, the traffic in human flesh and blood has been participated in by almost all nations, and the cruelties practised upon the African race have been most barbarous. We do not subscribe to the, sentiments of either Hawkins or Rich. We consider ourselves as associated in opinion with Granville Sharpe, Clarkson, Wilberforce, and others: whose exertions on behalf of the slave are imperishably recorded in the glorious pages of our history. The species of slavery here spoken of is the most ostensible; but there is another sort, of a more latent stamp, of which more anon.

Looking at the different aspects of this abused question, we think the negative side supplies its supporters with arguments forcible as regards number and cogency; and we attach ourselves to it through honest convictions. Let Mr. Cobden say what he will regarding the grounds of the fatal dispute that has already drenched the Western Hemisphere in the gore of her peoples, we firmly believe the designs of the Federals are more deeply laid than the generality of people imagine; and we congratulate ourselves that the major part of our readers will share our belief in some degree. On the slightest examination it may be discovered that the Federals are labouring with a will to circumscribe the commercial limits of Southern enterprise, fearing that its unrestricted exertions will swell into such a

magnitude, that the Northern power will be totally eclipsed. Frank Pierce, in his message to the house of representatives, declared that involuntary labour was highly needful to the prosperity of the States. Although the present President has not put forth similar sentiments, yet we believe his measures have a similar tendency. We conceive that Mr. Lincoln contemplates that, by riveting the manacles of taxation upon the light-complexioned portion of the Southern population, he contributes to the prosperity and wealth of the Northern States. This is slavery in the first degree. And all attempts made by the South to relieve themselves from these oppressive burdenswhich relief they claim as an equitable right-have been met by the Federals with a determined opposition. Were the Confederates to be allowed to monopolize sundry commercial privileges, they would at once take from the Northern resources to so large an extent, that its exchequer would soon be exhausted. The capabilities of the North are far inferior to those of the South. The ports of the South afford in every respect better accommodation for the issue of their own productions, and the receipt of imports, than the Northern ports do, and on the strictest principles of justice the South ought to be allowed to make such use of their advantages as they may require; and all prohibitory restrictions are nothing short of an artificial slavery the enslavement of States.

We do not feel ourselves justified in commending the proclamation of Mr. Lincoln respecting the compensation offered to every slaveholding State for the abolition of slavery. We are of opinion that nothing but mischief was intended by Mr. Lincoln's issue of it. Regarding the extradition treaty mentioned by some of the sympathizers with the North, we think the terms are much exaggerated, in order to strengthen the position assumed. We cannot conceive that an immediate and unconditional liberation of the slaves would be either just or humane. They are in a state of grossest ignorance, deplorable to contemplate; this none deny. Then, if such a mass of ignorant, and perhaps ferocious, beings were flung upon civilized society as an independent and integral part of the community, it is not difficult to conjecture the result. We strenuously maintain that the African is capable of receiving that cultivation required to constitute him a respectable citizen; yea, we have witnessed instances in which have been produced some of the noblest ornaments of civilization. The few specimens of intelligence manifested in the offspring of the African race must convince every species of civil society, that they are worthy of other stations than to be chained or confined to the ordinary employments of the slave. If they possess no capabilities of mental cultivation, why release them? for they must still receive the same treatment, bond or free. The blaze of displeasure ignited by the publication of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" impregnated the minds of most European communities with an inordinate degree of hatred against the slave. holder, and in some instances misguided the votaries of freedom. But we should be very circumspect whilst we are traversing the

regions of fiction; for in our opinion, Mrs. Beecher Stowe's publication was ex parte, and deeply imbued with romance. The investigation of truth requires both sides of the question to be heard, then impartiality will appear and decide. Cruelties are inflicted to an enormous extent, undoubtedly, but every slaveholder is not a Simon Legree.

Had slavery been the cause of the American war, and had the Northerns sincerely desired its abolition, why did they not-following the example of Great Britain-agree to buy up the slaves? They have caused an expense of life, treasure, prosperity, and human feeling, tenfold more than would have been requisite to redeem all the black population of the South, if proper and intelligent measures had been taken.

We fully believe that in case of Southern independence, the Federals will cease to uphold for any length of time the ordinary tenor of political dignity; and of this they are so fully convinced, that they, at every cost, are prepared to risk a national bankruptcy—which, in our humble opinion, is staring them in the face; but this not for freedom to the slave, but safety to themselves. With the prospect of another year's struggle, at the cost of nearly two hundred millions, they may well exhibit herculean efforts; but the very cost is proof that it is self, and not slaves, that interests them. And in order to engross the attention of the world, the Washington administration have raised, as a pretext, that the only views held by Mr. Lincoln's government are the final destruction and prohibitions of the institutions of slavery.

Although we have freely commented upon the events now passing in the New World, and that the designs of the North are more or less tinctured with cruelty, yet for humanity's sake we must refrain from bringing into our account the acts of baseness and inhumanity that have characterized many of the Northern chieftains; yet we beg to reiterate, that our sympathies are excited on the behalf of the slave, and we will ever maintain and defend, both with tongue and pen, their just claims upon all States for a restoration to Heaven's choicest endowment. Freedom is the legacy bequeathed to the offspring of man, that being animated by the "vital spark of heavenly flame," and any attempt to rob him thereof constitutes one of the basest sins extant. We hope to see, at no distant period, a revision in the constitutional codes of all communities, and the insertion of some provision for the betterment of the condition of this muchdegraded portion of society. Although the condition of the slave is not so degrading as it was in the time of ancient Rome, when they were ordained to shed each other's blood for the savage pastime of the upper classes, yet they have to submit, in sundry cases, to as much degrading treatment as had the gladiators of Rome.

We opine that Mr. Lincoln's policy and tenderness of heart are not so much interested in the condition of the slave as to cause him to expend the blood and treasure of his citizens solely for the unconditional liberation of the slave. S. F. T.

The Essayist.

CLASSICAL STUDIES.

In these utilitarian times the classical languages, and their utility in educating the mind, have given rise to much controversy. On the one hand, we hear of men like Sir Richard Philips counting the hours, days, and years, which, as they assert, the veriest tyro in these languages must necessarily have squandered; on the other hand, our public schools and universities countenance and require these studies, and the pens of profound scholars, such as Arnold and Clarke, have been employed in enumerating and describing the advantages which result from the study of the dead languages.

In this essay we do not purpose to bring prominently forward the advantages which have been ascribed to the study of language; nor to consider the objections that have been urged against Latin and Greek in particular, and the extensive part they form in most of our public educational institutions. It is to be hoped our object is a more beneficial one than that of merely comparing the pros and cons. of a controverted question. More beneficial, because more practicable. Let it not be supposed that we ignore or think little of the object for which this excellent Magazine is mainly intended. Argument is the very soul of intellectual culture.

We are already convinced of the great influence classics exercise upon the mind; how they widen its narrowness, open it for the reception of much that is pleasurable, and enable it to grasp thoughts and subjects that would otherwise be beyond the power of most intellects. With this opinion we start, and expect all or most of our readers will agree in sentiment with us; for this essay is chiefly intended to exhibit some of the advantages which a classical education gives, and at the same time to inform those who have been neglected in youth, or who wish to prosecute studies which, for some reason or other, they have been unable before to pursue. Of all others the study of language is the best mental gymnastic. We may compare the mind of man to a complicated piece of machinery, all the parts of which are brought into active simultaneous exercise by the study of a language. Mathematics cannot claim this power. Their influence is almost solely over the reasoning faculties, and this often to the neglect of all the others. Hence it not unfrequently happens that the profoundest mathematicians are non-literary men; men who have no appreciation of poetry or imaginative works of any kind; while, on the other hand, classical men must necessarily be literary men. But we do not purpose drawing a comparison between these means of education.