Syracuse Daily Courier and Union, March 1, 1861

There have been madmen in all ages, who on most subjects have seemed to the casual observer sane, and yet when the right subject was touched, have at once developed this particular frenzy which affected them. One poor wretch is monarch by right divine, another imagines himself to be the Lord Jesus, and another is a teapot or other fragile piece of crockery in constant peril of being broken up: and still another has his head turned so that he no longer looks ahead, but backward. But in this day, all these and other curious developments of madness seem to be superseded by the negro mania with large classes of fanatical men. Do they talk about liberty? It is the liberty of the blacks they mean, reckless of consequences to the whites. Do they demand the preservation [of] the Union? It means not the preservation of a natural Union founded on mutual good will and mutual toleration of fixed diversities of opinion, but a forced Union to subjugate the white and enfranchise the negro. Sambo is to these monomaniacs the type and model of American manhood, and they can see nothing except as it falls within his shadow. Sambo is the alpha and omega of freedom! They cannot rest content with the negro mania themselves but insist in forcing it on those to whom it is utterly revolting. They flaunt it persistently before the eye of the country and proclaim to the world as to this their black frenzy—

"There is a pleasure in being mad,
That none but madmen know"—

Proclaim it, even while the whole country and the great mass of their fellow citizens are suffering under the severest afflictions the direct and perhaps necessary results of their mania!

Of what consequence is the freedom and happiness of eight millions, aye of even twenty six millions of Anglo Saxons, so long as four millions of blacks are in servitude? Of what consequence is it to them that the non-restriction of slavery in the territories could make not one slave the more; nor its restriction therein by Congress not one slave less? Is it not a high moral and religious and political principle which therefore must over ride the Constitution and the laws as settled by the constitutional tribunals? Filled with a love for Sambo as their. specialty, shall they not, for freedom of opinion's sake deny to Southern men their constitutional rights in territories and over-ride in his behalf judicial decisions in favor of the slaveholder? While all men unite in demanding submission to the decisions of the Courts as to all questions which come before them affecting only the white man and his interests, are not opinions which involve the status of the black man, principles of an order so much higher than those affecting the whites, that they can neither be submitted to the decisions of Courts, nor otherwise in the least degree compromised? Is there not a special privilege in this government to negro-philists, to organize the government on the basis of their theories, and to administer it in conformity to negro-philist principles, setting aside and trampling under foot all laws, and all the most solemn decisions and constitutional provisions which conflict with their opinions? While denying to eight millions of people their adjudicated rights, if these people refuse to acknowledge a government guilty of this denial, shall not the whole people under the penalty of being denounced and hung as traitors be compelled to unite with these repudiators of Constitutional rights in denouncing and harassing, and subjugating to the negrophilist yoke the men who demand in or out of the Union conceded rights? Are not the latter worthy of blockades and a halter, the desolating fire and the destroying sword?—Are they not unworthy even of propositions of reasonable compromise as to matters supposed to be clearly decided in their favor, until they shall first on bended knee sue for the forgiveness of those who supercede laws by substituting their own dicta in the high places where laws once ruled? And shall they not first submit themselves unconditionally to an administration supposed to be pledged to overthrow the principles established in their favor by the Courts, to men pledged to make the very opposite of these principles the rule of the government?

We trust no Republican will censure us for following the illustrious example of their President elect in his Indianapolis speech, especially when like him, we declare that we merely ask these questions that the people may consider them and answer them for themselves, according to their own sober convictions; and further that it is not our purpose to express any opinion upon them one way or the other!

But let us do more than Mr. Lincoln condescends to do on that occasion. While waiving an expression of opinion as to those questions, we will not hesitate to speak plainly on another. It is well known that the opinions of the Republican party, as avowed by them in their platform, are in direct antagonism to the opinions, not alone of one party at the South but of the whole people. It is equally well known that while the former are supported by no law, and by no legal decisions, the latter point to the decisions of the Courts and demand our assent not to their will or their opinion, but to the rights established by the decision of that tribunal which adjudicates and settles all other contested questions. If the Republicans who supported Mr. Lincoln on the antislavery grounds of the Republican platform can not honorably recede from their position; still less can the Southern people recede with honor, not alone from their own opinions but from their rights, settled and confirmed as firmly as any rights can be by any mere human tribunal, as they believe. Such secession can perhaps be reasonably expected from neither; least of all from the South! There can then be no adjustment except on some neutral basis, which while evading an expression against either opinion, or compromising both, shall yet, if not entirely satisfactory to all, give reasonable satisfaction to the mass of moderate and reasonable men of all sections. They who fight against all compromise therefore fight against all conciliation, fight for an indefinite continuance of the present disasters; for subjugation and the sword, for carnage and civil war; for the extension of what they call rebellion; and are the real authors of disunion.