the
other shore."

The declaration of Mr. Underwood as to the entire dependence of the
slave masters on the citizens of the nominally Free States to guard
their plantations, and secure them against desertion, is substantially
confirmed by Thomas D. Arnold, of Tennessee, who, in a speech on the
name subject, assures us that they are equally dependent on the North
for _personal protection_ against their slaves. In assigning his
reasons for adhering to the Union, Mr. Arnold makes use of the
following language:

"The Free States had a majority of 44 in that House. Under the
new census, they would have 53. The cause of the slaveholding
States was getting weaker and weaker, and what were they to
do? He would ask his Southern friends what the South had to
rely on, if the Union were dissolved? Suppose the dissolution
could be peaceably effected (if that did not involve a
contradiction in terms), what had the South to depend upon?
_All the crowned heads were against her. A million of slaves
were ready to rise and strike for freedom at the first tap of
the drum._ If they were cut loose from their friends at the
North (friends that ought to be, and without them, the South
had no friends), _whither were they to look for protection_?
How were they to sustain an assault from England or France,
with the cancer at their vitals? The more the South reflected,
the more clearly she must see that she has a deep and vital
interest in maintaining the Union."

These witnesses can neither be impeached nor ruled out of Court, and
their testimony is true. While, therefore, the Union is preserved, I
see no end to the extension or perpetuity of Chattel Slavery--no hope
for peaceful deliverance of the millions who are clanking their chains
on our blood-red soil. Yet I know that God reigns, and that the slave
system contains within itself the elements of destruction. But how
long it is to curse the earth, and desecrate his image, he alone
foresees. It is frightful to think of the capacity of a nation like
this to commit sin, before the measure of its iniquities be filled,
and the exterminating judgments of God overtake it. For what is left
us but "a fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation"? Or
is God but a phantom, and the Eternal Law but a figment of the
imagination? Has an everlasting divorce been effected between cause
and effect, and is it an absurd doctrine th