The object of this work has been from historical data toshow that the Southern States had rightfully the power towithdraw from a Union into which they had, as sovereign communities,voluntarily entered; that the denial of that right wasa violation of the letter and spirit of the compact between theStates; and that the war waged by the Federal Governmentagainst the seceding States was in disregard of the limitationsof the Constitution, and destructive of the principles of theDeclaration of Independence.
The author, from his official position, may claim to haveknown much of the motives and acts of his countrymen immediatelybefore and during the war of 1861-'65, and he hassought to furnish material far the future historian, who, whenthe passions and prejudices of the day shall have given placeto reason and sober thought, may, better than a contemporary,investigate the causes, conduct, and results of the war.
The incentive to undertake the work now offered to thepublic was the desire to correct misapprehensions created byindustriously circulated misrepresentations as to the acts andpurposes of the people and the General Government of the ConfederateStates. By the reiteration of such unappropriate termsas "rebellion" and "treason," and the asseveration that theSouth was levying war against the United States, those ignorantof the nature of the Union, and of the reserved powers of theStates, have been led to believe that the Confederate Stateswere in the condition of revolted provinces, and that the UnitedStates were forced to resort to arms for the preservation oftheir existence. To those who knew that the Union was formedfor specific enumerated purposes, and that the States had neversurrendered their sovereignty it was a palpable absurdity toapply to them, or to their citizens when obeying their mandates,the terms "rebellion" and "treason"; and, further, it is shownin the following pages that the Confederate States, so far frommaking war or seeking to destroy the United States, as soon asthey had an official organ, strove earnestly, by peaceful recognition,to equitably adjust all questions growing out of the separationfrom their late associates.
Another great perversion of truth has been the arraignmentof the men who participated in the formation of the Confederacyand who bore arms in its defense, as the instigators of a controversyleading to disunion. Sectional issues appear conspicuouslyin the debates of the Convention which framed the FederalConstitution, and its many compromises were designed to securean equilibrium between the sections, and to preserve the interestsas well as the liberties of the several States. African servitudeat that time was not confined to a section, but was numericallygreater in the South than in the North, with a tendencyto its continuance in the former and cessation in the latter. Ittherefore thus early presents itself as a disturbing element, andthe provisions of the Constitution, which were known to benecessary for its adoption, bound all the States to recognize andprotect that species of property. When at a subsequent periodthere arose in the Northern States an antislavery agitation, itwas a harmless and scarcely noticed movement until politicaldemagogues seized upon it as a means to acquire power. Hadit been left to pseudo-philanthropists and fanatics, most zealouswhere least informed, it never could have shaken the foundationsof the Union and have incited one section to carry fireand sword into the other. That the agitation was political inits character, and was clearly developed as early as 1803, it is believedhas been established in these pages. To preserve a sect