http

The Philadelphia Daily News stated in an editorial on November 22, 1860, “It is neither for the good of the colored race nor of our own that they should continue to dwell among us to any considerable extant. The two races can never exist in conjunction except as superior and inferior . . . . The African is naturally the inferior race.”

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 425

The Niles ( Michigan ) Republican wrote on March 30, 1861, that “this government was made for the benefit of the white race . . . . and not for Negroes.”

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 499

On February 2, 1861 the Providence Daily Post declared “We have on more right to meddle with slavery in Georgia , than we have to meddle with monarchy in Europe ,”.

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 441

The Columbus ( Ohio ) Crisis wrote on February 7, 1861 “we are not Abolitionists nor in favor of Negro equality.”

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 454

On March 7, 1861, the paper with the largest circulation in the country, the New York Herald, had this to say about slavery: “The immense increase in the numbers (of slaves) within so short a time speaks for the good treatment and happy, contented lot of the slaves. They are comfortably fed, housed and clothed, and seldom or never overworked.”

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 455

The Daily Chicago Times on December 7, 1860 editorialized that “evil and nothing but evil, has ever followed in the track of this hideous monster, Abolition.” Further on it stated, “Let (the slave) alone-send him back to his master where he belongs.”

Northern Editorials on Secession by Howard C. Perkins ( Gloucester , Mass. : Peter Smith) p. 431

“Both Indiana (1816) and Illinois (1818) abolished slavery by their constitutions. And both followed the Ohio policy of trying to prevent black immigration by passing laws requiring blacks who moved into the state to produce legal documents verifying that they were free and posting bond to guarantee their good behavior. The bond requirements ranged as high as $1,000, which was prohibitive for a black American in those days. Anti-immigration legislation passed in Illinois in 1819, 1829, and 1853. In Indiana , such laws were enacted in 1831 and 1852. Michigan Territory passed such a law in 1827; Iowa Territory passed one in 1839 and Iowa enacted another in 1851 after it became a state. Oregon Territory passed such a law in 1849.[8] Blacks who violated the law faced punishments that included advertisement and sale at public auction ( Illinois , 1853).”

Henry W. Farnam, Chapters in the History of Social Legislation in the United States to 1860, Washington: Carnegie Institution, 1938, pp.219-20.

"When the Government was forced to take up arms, it did so to defend its own integrity, not to destroy slavery."

In an article titled "THE LOUNGER" appearing on page 546 of the August 31, 1861 issue of Harper's Weekly

"In the first place, neither Congress nor the Administration has any more power to free the slaves in Virginia than to confiscate cattle in New England." Further in the article it states " Finally, as has been well observed by leading statesmen, the hour of battle is not the time for the emancipation of four millions of slaves."

In an article titled "SLAVERY AND THE WAR" appearing on page 530 of the August 24, 1861 issue of Harper's Weekly

"The End and the Way - We must never lose sight of the main object of the war, and of the means by which that object can be attained...This war is prosecuted for the maintenance of the Union and of the indivisible nationality of the United States . It is not, as foreigners suppose, a war for tariffs, or on account of slavery. The United States Government has no other object in view than the assertion of its authority over the whole of its dominion, and the practical refutation of the subversive doctrines of secession and State sovereignty."

Harper's Weekly, December 21, 1861

“The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing....It is very clear that the South gains by this process, and we lose. No---we MUST NOT "let the South go."

Union Democrat , Manchester , NH , February 19, 1861

“That either revenue from duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the ports must be closed to importations from abroad....If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws are substantially repealed; the sources which supply our treasury will be dried up; we shall have no money to carry on the government; the nation will become bankrupt before the next crop of corn is ripe.....Allow rail road iron to be entered at Savannah with the low duty of ten per cent, which is all that the Southern Confederacy think of laying on imported goods, and not an ounce more would be imported at New York; the railroads would be supplied from the southern ports”.

New York Evening Post March 12, 1861, recorded in Northern Editorials on Secession, Howard C. Perkins, ed., 1965, pp. 598-599.

“The predicament in which both the Government and the commerce of the country are placed, through the non-enforcement of our revenue laws, is now thoroughly understood the world over....If the manufacturer at Manchester [England] can send his goods into the Western States through New Orleans at less cost than through New York, he is a fool for not availing himself of his advantage...If the importations of the counrty are made through Southern ports, its exports will go through the same channel. The produce of the West, instead of coming to our own port by millions of tons, to be transported abroad by the same ships through which we received our importations, will seek other routes and other outlets. With the lost of our foreign trade, what is to become of our public works, conducted at the cost of many huindred millions of dollars, to turn into our harbor the products of the interior? They share in the common ruin. So do our manufacturers...Once at New Orleans , goods may be distributed over the whole country duty-free. The process is perfectly simple... The commercial bearing of the question has acted upon the North...We now see clearly whither we are tending, and the policy we must adopt. With us it is no longer an abstract question---one of Constitutional construction, or of the reserved or delegated powers of the State or Federal government, but of material existence and moral position both at home and abroad.....We were divided and confused till our pockets were touched”.

New York Times March 30, 1861

"The South has furnished near three-fourths of the entire exports of the country. Last year she furnished seventy-two percent of the whole...we have a tariff that protects our manufacturers from thirty to fifty percent, and enables us to consume large quantities of Southern cotton, and to compete in our whole home market with the skilled labor of Europe . This operates to compel the South to pay an indirect bounty to our skilled labor, of millions annually."

Daily Chicago Times, December 10, 1860