Note 21 — Chapter I · AGRICULTURE. (continued 2)

The dispute between the abolitionists and their adversaries is always made to turn on the point of distinction between freedom of discussion and political interference. With the views now entertained by the south, she can never be satisfied on this head. She requires nothing short of a dead silence upon the subject of human rights. This demand is made by her state governors of the state governors of the north. It will, of course, never be granted. The course of the abolitionists seems to themselves clear enough; and they act accordingly. They labour politically only with regard to the District of Columbia, over which Congress holds exclusive jurisdiction. Their other endeavour is to promote the discussion of the moral question throughout the free States. They use no direct means to this end in the slave States;—in the first place, because they have no power to do so; and in the next, because the requisite movement there is sure to follow upon that in the north. It is wholly untrue that they insinuate their publications into the south. Their only political transgression (and who will call it a moral one?) is, helping fugitive slaves. The line between free discussion and political interference has never yet been drawn to the satisfaction of both parties, and never will be.