NORTH AND SOUTH.

THE CONTROVERSY IN A COLLOQUY.

PART I.

SCENE: Washington. TIME: Before the Election.

North. I'll bet ten thousand dollars that Abraham Lincoln will be the next President of the United States.

South. And I will bet twice ten thousand dollars that he will be the last!

North. What do you mean?

South. I mean that in the event of the election of a sectional President, the Southern States will secede from the Union.

North. But we shall not let you go.

South. Then we shall go without your "letting."

North. Then we shall force you to come back.

South. You cannot force us. In the first

B

place, you have not the right; and in the second place, you have not the power.

North. Nonsense! As to the right of a State to secede from the Federal Union, I admit that it is a question about which people differ; but as to the power to prevent it, why we can outnumber you five to one. Have you forgotten South Carolina's "nullification" threats in the days of President Jackson; and how "Old Hickory's" by-the-eternal oath to hang the first man who dared to raise his hand in rebellion against the Union, brought the nullifiers to terms, and has kept them quiet for thirty years

?

South. And have you forgotten that your pet Massachusetts, which balances South Carolina in ultraism, sectionalism, or "State pride," has repeatedly threatened to retire from the Union in consequence of unpalatable legislation at Washington? Would to heaven she had gone out and all New England with her. The remaining States might possibly have got on in harmony. The fact is, your New England Puritanism, or Pharisaism, is an incompatible element in the "body politic." Having seceded from Old England for the ostensible purpose of enjoying "religious toleration," you have always been, from the time of the landing of the Mayflower at Plymouth, in 1620, down to the present