… There is no disposition, on the part of the great body of the Northern people to wage war upon Slavery, or to countenance any aggressions upon Southern rights.
But the question assumes a very different shape. Slavery has nothing whatever to do with the tremendous issues now awaiting decision. It has disappeared almost entirely from the political discussions of the day. No one mentions it in connection with our present complications.
No man, anywhere in the North, proposes for a moment to interfere with Slavery in any Southern State. No man proposes to exclude Slavery by Congressional action from any Territory. No man proposes to interfere in any way with the execution of the Fugitive Slave law, or in any way to interfere with the equality of the States, or the rights, privileges and immunities of the citizens of all the States, in regard to the institution of Slavery.
If the Times says so, it must be so.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
You act as if you've uncovered some smoking gun. The Times only repeats the point made over and over again, from Lincoln's first inaugural to these threads. The union went to war to preserve the union and in response to the southern attack on Ft. Sumter. The south seceded to protect against a perceived Republican threat to their rights as slaveholders.