Keep Your Hands Out of Our Pockets
I believe Bernhard’s post (just after this one) ANSWERS this one, don’t you? Obviously, the difference had to do with what each section believed was required of the central government by it and of it by the central government. The South wished to be left alone with the federal government doing only such things as were constitutionally prescribed. The North apparently wanted a great deal more from the federal government all the while knowing that the monies used by that government and given to it came – in large part – from the South! So the federal government itself in the end became the means by which money was taken from the South and given to the North.
Furthermore, the South could read the handwriting on the wall. With the ever expanding nation, it was clear that the new territories as they became states would side with the North and why not? That was the profitable thing to do! The South could not expand (albeit Missouri and Oklahoma might have joined forces with that section; maybe Arizona as well. But the vast majority of new states coming into the United States would side with the North and render the South into a permanent minority that would be forced to financially support a much larger majority. The South would become the host for a Northern collectivist, fascistic economic parasite without any hope of reducing the power of the federal entity that acted as a sort of “anti-Robin Hood”, taking from the poor and giving to the rich.
Of course, we now know that the Northern states were misguided in believing that they could empower the central government and maintain their own liberty. In the end, the “means to an end” used by the North became the end itself and now ALL are prostrate under the tyranny of the “federal government”.
Keep Your Hands Out of Our Pockets
“On the 14th of December
“But the gentleman says that when Southern men’s measures are vetoed, they raise their voices in tones of thunder until they carry them. Sir, I do not believe there ever was a Southern measure vetoed. I do not recollect one. The South has never asked anything from your Government that called for a veto. There is the difference between us. The South asks but small favors from you. It is a class of gentlemen from the North who ask aid from the Government. Why, we never come here in that attitude. Let me ask the gentleman when any measure from the South was ever vetoed?, when the South ever asked anything that required the exercise of the veto power?
But the gentleman said that he admired the South, because “knowing their rights, they dared maintain them.” That I take as a compliment. And now, what is his position? Why the South, “knowing their rights, and daring to maintain them,” he would have the North rise up and prevent her from getting her known and acknowledged rights! If we know our rights, and they are our rights, and we dare maintain them, why ought not the North,—why ought not the gentleman (I will not say the North) to grant us our rights? Have we ever asked anything but what was right? That is the position that the South has always occupied, as I remember her history.”
“Now, sir, upon the subject of internal improvements which the gentleman alluded to, has the South ever asked legislative aid in that particular? I do not speak now sectionally, or against the North; but look at the whole history of the Government. Who is it that is constantly appealing here for legislative aid and legislative patronage? Who ask for fishing bounties? Who ask for protection to navigation? Who is that wants a duty on coal? Who upon iron? Who upon woolen goods? Who upon shoes, leather, cotton fabrics—everything? Why the industrial interests of the North. But when did we ever come up and ask any aid from the Government of the United States? The constant prayer of the South to you has been to stay your hands. All that we ask of you is,—keep your hands out of our pockets.”
(Life of Alexander H. Stephens, Richard Malcolm Johnson, William Hand Browne, J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1883, pp. 280-281)