* Of which number, in Missouri, 115,619 are slaves.
To these must be added, to make up the population of the United
States as it stood in 1860, -
The separate District of Columbia, in which is
included Washington, the seat of the Federal
Government 75,321
California 384,770
Oregon 52,566
The Territories of -
Dacotah 4,839
Nebraska 28,892
Washington 11,624
Utah 49,000
New Mexico 98,024
Colorado 34,197
Nevada 6,857
- - - -
Total 741,090
And thus the total population may be given as follows: -
North 10,582,099
South 7,649,660
Doubtful 3,582,684
West 9,140,390
Outlying States and Territories 741,090
- - - - -
Total 31,695,923
Each of the three interests would consider itself wronged by the
division above made, but the South would probably be the loudest in
asserting its grievance. The South claims all the slave States,
and would point to secession in Virginia to justify such claim, and
would point also to Maryland and Baltimore, declaring that
secession would be as strong there as at New Orleans, if secession
were practicable. Maryland and Baltimore lie behind Washington,
and are under the heels of the Northern troops, so that secession
is not practicable; but the South would say that they have seceded
in heart. In this the South would have some show of reason for its
assertion; but nevertheless I shall best convey a true idea of the
position of these States by classing them as doubtful. When
secession shall have been accomplished - if ever it be accomplished -
it will hardly be possible that they should adhere to the South.
It will be seen by the foregoing tables that the population of the
West is nearly equal to that of the North, and that therefore
Western power is almost as great as Northern. It is almost as
great already, and as population in the West increases faster than
it does in the North, the two will soon be equalized. They are
already sufficiently on a par to enable them to fight on equal
terms, and they will be prepared for fighting - political fighting,
if no other - as soon as they have established their supremacy over
a common enemy.
While I am on the subject of population I should explain - though
the point is not one which concerns the present argument - that the
numbers given, as they regard the South, include both the whites
and the blacks, the free men and the slaves. The political power
of the South is of course in the hands of the white race only, and
the total white population should therefore be taken as the number
indicating the Southern power. The political power of the South,
however, as contrasted with that of the North, has, since the
commencement of the Union, been much increased by the slave
population. The slaves have been taken into account in determining
the number of representatives which should be sent to Congress by
each State. That number depends on the population but it was
decided in 1787 that in counting up the number of representatives
to which each State should be held to be entitled, five slaves
should represent three white men. A Southern population,
therefore, of five thousand free men and five thousand slaves would
claim as many representatives as a Northern population of eight
thousand free men, although the voting would be confined to the
free population. This has ever since been the law of the United
States.
The Western power is nearly equal to that of the North, and this
fact, somewhat exaggerated in terms, is a frequent boast in the
mouths of Western men. "We ran Fremont for President," they say,
"and had it not been for Northern men with Southern principles, we
should have put him in the White House instead of the traitor
Buchanan. If that had been done there would have been no
secession." How things might have gone had Fremont been elected in
lieu of Buchanan, I will not pretend to say; but the nature of the
argument shows the difference that exists between Northern and
Western feeling. At the time that I was in the West, General
Fremont was the great topic of public interest. Every newspaper
was discussing his conduct, his ability as a soldier, his energy,
and his fate. At that time General McClellan was in command at
Washington on the Potomac, it being understood that he held his
power directly under the President, free from the exercise of
control on the part of the veteran General Scott, though at that
time General Scott had not actually resigned his position as head
of the army. And General Fremont, who some five years before had
been "run" for President by the Western States, held another
command of nearly equal independence in Missouri. He had been put
over General Lyon in the Western command, and directly after this
General Lyon had fallen in battle at Springfield, in the first
action in which the opposing armies were engaged in the West.
General Fremont at once proceeded to carry matters with a very high
hand, On the 30th of August, 1861, he issued a proclamation by
which he declared martial law at St. Louis, the city at which he
held his headquarters, and indeed throughout the State of Missouri
generally. In this proclamation he declared his intention of
exercising a severity beyond that ever threatened, as I believe, in
modern warfare. He defines the region presumed to be held by his
army of occupation, drawing his lines across the State, and then
declares "that all persons who shall be taken with arms in their
hands within those lines shall be tried by court-martial, and if
found guilty will be shot." He then goes on to say that he will
confiscate all the property of persons in the State who shall have
taken up arms against the Union, or shall have taken part with the
enemies of the Union, and that he will make free all slaves
belonging to such persons.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 49 of 141
Words from 49039 to 50129
of 143277
