The Roots of Hate: How the Republican Party Created a Hatred for the South

Yes, Ron Paul is a Republican, true. But, the label of Party is not a monolithic edifice, but a structure of differing ideologies within. Ron Paul is of the "libertarian" view as were our Founders. Today's GOP leaders are of the Hamiltonian vintage of the earlier Whig Party. So, then when you conclude the Republican Party is comparatively "conservative" to the Democrats, you must look under the cloak of deception for the truth. As for me, I'll take a "Jeffersonian Democrat" any day, but being patient, I'll take 'em like Ron Paul while I wait!

---

CHAPTER 16 [snippet]

First Posted 6/2012 by Charleston Voice

 

Alexander Hamilton was the head and front of American Monarchists. He wanted to make this Government a pure Monarchy. Hamilton advocated a “strong centralized Government,” of imperial policy.

Gouverneur Morris, a contemporary and friend of Hamilton, said:

“Hamilton hated Republican Government, and never failed on every occasion to advocate the excellence of and avow his attachment to a Monarchic form of Government:

From the formation of the Union, the Federalists of New England hated and feared Democratic principles. Their great leader, Hamilton, made no secret of this feeling. In his speech at a New York banquet Hamilton, in high opposition to Jefferson’s Democracy, cried out: “The People! Gentlemen, I tell you the people are a great Beast!”

In 1796 Gov. Walcott, of Connecticut, said:

“I sincerely declare that I wish the Northern States would separate from the Southern the moment that event (the election of Jefferson) shall take place.”

Congressman Plumer. a Federalist and an ardent Secessionist, in 1804 declared that—

“All dissatisfied with the measures of the Government looked to a separation of the States as a remedy for grievances.”

As early as 1796, men of Massachusetts began to talk of New England seceding from the Union. It was declared that if Jay’s negotiation closing the Mississippi for twenty years could not be adopted, it was high time for the New England States to secede from the Union and form a Confederation by themselves. The Monarchic principles did not thrive under Hamilton’s lead. Hamilton was too plain spoken. The Republican party became more astute. In 1861, while making loud professions of desiring the largest freedom for the people, that party was making ready to rob them of every liberty they possessed. “At the formation of this Union,” says E. P. Powell, “Hamilton laid before the Constitutional Convention of 1787 eleven propositions, which he wished to make the basis of the Union, but they were so Monarchistic in tone they received no support whatever.”

The Republican war on the South stood solidly on Monarchic principles. The principles of 1776 were set aside in the 6os, but not for years after the South was conquered did Republicans openly admit they were inspired by the spirit of Monarchy. During McKinley’s last campaign, Hamilton was loudly lauded and Jefferson decried as a visionary, a French anarchist. Hamilton Clubs were organized and Republican novelists set to writing romances with Hamilton as the hero. During Garfield’s campaign, a Republican paper, the Lemars, Iowa, Sentinel, said:

“Garfield’s rule will be the transitory period between State Sovereignty and National Sovereignty. The United States Senate will give way to a National Senate. State Constitutions and the United States Senate are relics of State Sovereignty and implements of treason. Garfield’s Presidency will be the Regency of  Stalwartism ; after that—Rex.”

Fate used the hand of an insane “Stalwart” to impede, if not stop, the Monarchic plans of that time. The New York Sun, July 3rd, 1881, quoted President Garfield as saying:

“The influence of Jefferson’s Democratic principles is rapidly waning, while the principles of Hamilton are rapidly increasing. Power has been gravitating toward the Central Government.”

Power did not gravitate, it was wrenched at one jerk to the Central Government by Lincoln’s hand, as will be seen later on. Not until after Hamilton and Jefferson had passed away did the followers of Jefferson drop the name “Republican” which they had borne during his life, and assume the name “Democrat.” 

Democracy—the rule of the people—is more expressive of Jefferson’s doctrines. Not until 1854 did the men of the Federal and Whig persuasion unite and organize a party and take the name “Republican.” The Republican party of the 6os was the legitimate offspring of the old New England Federalists, and inherited all its progenitor’s faiths, hopes, hates and purposes, viz: Passion for power, fear and hate of Democracy, hate of the Union, belief in States’ Rights, in States’ Sovereignty, in Secession, and the strong persistent determination to break the Union asunder and form of the Northeast section a Northeastern Confederacy. All these ideas belonged to the old Federalists of New England, and were handed down to the Republican party in 1854.

Wendell Phillips, New England’s tongue of fire, speaking of the inherent purposes of his party’, said:

“The Republican party is in no sense a national party. It is a party of the North, organized against the South.”

The Republican party was organized against the South, organized to fight the South in every possible way; to fight as its progenitors, the Federalists, had fought from 1796 to 1854, with calumnies, vituperations, false charges, every word and phrase hate could use, until the time came to use guns, bayonets, bullets, cannon balls and shells; and faithfully did that party carry out the ignoble and cruel purpose of its organization. The war on the South was begun by the Federalists of New England in 1796. In 1814 a work of some four hundred and fifty pages, called “The Olive Branch,” was published in Boston, which throws electric light on certain almost forgotten events in New England’s history. “The Olive Branch” contains extracts from a series of remarkable productions called the “Pelham Papers,” which appeared in the Connecticut Courant in the year 1796. The Courant was published by Hudson and Goodwin, men of Revolutionary standing. The Pelham Papers were said to have been the joint production of men of the first talent and influence in the State. Commenting on these papers of 1796, the “Olive Branch” of 1814 says:

“A Northeastern Confederacy has been the object for a number of years. They (the politicians of New England) have repeatedly advocated in public print, separation of the States. The project of separation was formed shortly after the adoption of the Federal Constitution. The promulgation of the project first appeared in the year 1796, in these Pelham Papers. At that time there was none of that catalogue of grievances which since that period, have been fabricated to justify the recent attempt to dissolve the Union.”

This refers to the efforts made in 1804 and 1814 to get the New England States to secede from the Union, so they might be separated from the Democratic Southern and Western States. The “Olive Branch” continues:

“At that time there was no “Virginia Dynasty,” no “Democratic Madness,” no “war with Great Britain.” The affairs of the country seemed to be precisely according to New England’s fondest wishes. Yet at that favorable time (1796) New England was dissatisfied with the Union and begun to plot to get out of it. 

The common people, however, were not then ready to break up the Union. The common people at that time had no dislike of the Southern States. Then New England writers, preachers and politicians deliberately began the wicked work of poisoning their minds against the Southern States. To sow hostility, discord and jealousy between the different sections of the Union was the first step New England took to accomplish her favorite object, a separation of the States. 

Without this efficient instrument, all New England’s efforts would have been utterly unavailing. Had the honest yeomanry of the Eastern States continued to respect and regard their Southern fellow-citizens as friends and brothers, having one common interest in the promotion of the general welfare, it would be impossible to have made them instruments in the unholy work of destroying the noble, the splendid Union.”

But for the unholy work of having taught the common people of New England to hate the people of the South, the cruel war of the 6os would never have been fought.

“For eighteen years,” continues the “Olive Branch” (the eighteen years from 1796 to 1814), “the most unceasing endeavors have been used to poison the’ minds of the people of the Eastern States toward, and to alienate them from, their fellow-citizens of the Southern States. The people of the South have been portrayed as “demons incarnate,” as destitute of all the “good qualities which dignify and adorn human nature.” Nothing can exceed the virulence of the pictures drawn of the South’s people, their descriptions of whom would more have suited the ferocious inhabitants of New Zealand than a polished, civilized people.”

[Snippet from Chapter 16 of Facts and falsehoods concerning the war on the South, 1861-1865, G. Edmonds, 1904]

Read also: Chapter 21:  A Hatred of Democracy was the Real Cause of the Republican War on the South

Return to Southern History