59
PAPERS OF :MrnAIJEAU BUONAPARTE L,U!AR
knowledgement of that duty, or inspirited to its performance by the force of sylogisms or the flowers of rhetorick. All argument on such must fall, unfelt and unfruitful as the wasted rains on Zaahara. But the bold and chivalerous patriot- the friend of freedom and the foe of tyranny- wi.Jl require no other reasoning to convince him of this duty, than the .promptings of an honest nature; and once convinced; I ween it would take an argument as potent as that which bowed the top of "high Plinlimmon," to convince him that in the faithful dis- charge of its high and imperious obligations, he commits treason either against the government of earth, or the government of Heaven. I am satisfied myself that many of the Unio·n leaders, who contend for absolute dominion in the General Government, and unlimited sub- mission in the States- that those who assert the right of the former to enforce her unconstitutional mandates by the bayonet, and deny to the latter all right of resistance and redress without 'incurring the crime ai1d consequences of treason, have gone into these doctrins from some other consideration than a full conviction of their truth and soundness. It seems impossible that any one can plunge into error so preposterous, for the want of intelligence and light. Since the days of the Revolution, no set of men who seek to lead the people and give direction to public sentiment can plead stupidity or ignorance in jus- tification of their adherence to the debasing principles of passive obe- dience and non-resistance. The plea cannot be fairly made for even the humblest intellect. The plainest mind that rises three ideas above the bird of proverbial dulncss, it seems to me would be all-sufficient to grapple with the questions- "When my State shall be invaded by an army for the purpose of forcing upon her unconstitutional and oppres- sive laws, shall I take sides for, or against her? If for her, am I a traitor'?" 'l'o questions so plain and self-evident, the m1'.nd of man can give but one answer; but the passions of man may dictate another. He whose _heart is properly regulated, I care not how dull may be his head, will find no difficulty in arriving at the safe and legitimate con- clusion, that it will uot only be his duty in such an eYent to draw in defense of his invaded and injured State, but that he who denies the right and refuses the servise, is himself the traitor. And here lies the difference in the feelings and principles of the two parties. The. one makes it a virtue to fight on the side of the injure~- the other calls it a crime; the one looks upon the defense of his rights and the re- pelling of tyranny as patriotism- the other holds it as rebellion. Even when the cup of bitterness is filled to overflowing, we are told that we have no right to turn it from the lip.5- that a refusal to drink the very dregs is treason against the hand that unlocks the fountniu. And can such really be the doctrin of a majority of the people of Georgia- cun it be the c1octrine of a majority, even of the Union Party? I know that is the doctrine of their leaders- the doctrine of the Proclamation- the doctrine of all who look to the General Gov- ernment for farnrs; of all whose patriotism is subordinate to selfish- nci<i-:, and whose party hatred and revenge are stron~er than thC'ir lo,·e of liberty. But how is it pos:-ible that it cnn he the doetrinc of nn honest uncorrupted yeomanry- of an industrious & \'irtuous popula- tion, who ha\'e no· selfish ·sc:heme::: to accompli:-h-no 11mbition to gratify-no revenges to satiate?
•
Powered by FlippingBook