The causes of the war or rather of seces sion, as viewed by the South Carolina Secession Convention, are here briefly epitomized: (1) The American Revolution established the right of i State to govern itself and the right of a people to abolish a government, and that each colony became a free, sovereign and independ ent State. (2) That the Constitution is a com pact and was agreed to by soverign States. Since the obligation established by a compact is mutual, its violation by a single party to the contract releases the others. (3) We assert that 14 States have refused for years to fulfil their constitutional obligations by hindering the return of fugitive slaves. (4) "These States have assumed the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions') and have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery. (5) They have permitted societies to disturb the peace and incite servile insurrec tion. (6) They have elected a man President who is hostile to slavery and who has declared that the government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. This analysis of the causes as stated by the first State to secede shows that the irritating and real cause was the question of slavery and that the doctrine of State sovereignty was used as a justification of the act of secession.
Finally it may be said that another cause which hastened the sectionalization of opinion and interests was the very great ignorance of the two sections of each other. The main
line of migration, travel and commerce were east and west instead of north and south. This situation promoted ignorance and ignorance promoted suspicion and hate. The result was that people of the extreme North and of the extreme South had the most exaggerated notions of the characters, manners and views of the other. From these portions of each section came the bitterest partisans in the con flict. There was little toleration in their views. But the people who neighbored across "Mason and Dixon's Line' were very different in their attitude. Their position was born of personal experience. They knew each other and knew that men on opposite banks of the Ohio River were really more alike than different. What ever of moderation there was in the conflict was largely due to the people of the border States. Does not this justify the conclusion that if the two sections had really known each other the contest would have lost much of its bitterness and might have taken another form, and the controversy have ended short of war? Certainly the nation paid a dear price for its partisanship and sectional bitterness.
Chadwick, F. E., Causes of the Civil War> (1906) ; Crawford, S. W., 'Genesis of the Civil War' (New York 1887) ; Hosmer, .1. K., The Appeal to Arms' (New York 1907).