It is not a declaration of the
law alone which limits the control of the father over the son, but in
the order of nature there is a time when the son is capable of self-
judgment, and thereafter as regards rights they are on terms of
equality, and all civil and social arrangements proceed upon that
theory.
But had Great Britain proposed union in 1775 to us, as in 1800 she did
to Ireland, the obstacles were so serious that a separation must
ultimately have taken place. One was the breadth of ocean between the
two parts of the empire--then, and for sixty years, a more serious
obstacle than at present. Another was the peerage--a part of the
British system which could not have been abolished without the
overthrow of the government, and yet incapable of introduction here.
The proposition would have shocked the moral sentiment and the
political principles of the whole people. And finally, our growing
commerce, uneasy under monopolizing restraints and rival domination,
demanded the freedom of the sea. Therefore it is evident that a union
could not have been formed with any hope of permanence and power. Nor
could the separation have taken place at a more fortunate time. The
whole world would have had cause to regret our participation in the
wars of Napoleon, and from them we were saved by independence.
Although the existence of these natural sources of alienation and
disunion must be admitted, they furnish no justification for the
general policy of England--first negligent, then jealous, then
oppressive, and finally reckless and sanguinary.
Pages:
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198