<h2>CONCLUSION.</h2>
</center>
<br/>
<br/>
<p>The cause of the great War of the Rebellion against the United
Status will have to be attributed to slavery. For some years before
the war began it was a trite saying among some politicians that "A
state half slave and half free cannot exist." All must become slave
or all free, or the state will go down. I took no part myself in
any such view of the case at the time, but since the war is over,
reviewing the whole question, I have come to the conclusion that
the saying is quite true.</p>
<p>Slavery was an institution that required unusual guarantees for
its security wherever it existed; and in a country like ours where
the larger portion of it was free territory inhabited by an
intelligent and well-to-do population, the people would naturally
have but little sympathy with demands upon them for its protection.
Hence the people of the South were dependent upon keeping control
of the general government to secure the perpetuation of their
favorite institution. They were enabled to maintain this control
long after the States where slavery existed had ceased to have the
controlling power, through the assistance they received from odd
men here and there throughout the Northern States. They saw their
power waning, and this led them to encroach upon the prerogatives
and independence of the Northern States by enacting such laws as
the Fugitive Slave Law. By this law every Northern man was obliged,
when properly summoned, to turn out and help apprehend the runaway
slave of a Southern man. Northern marshals became slave-catchers,
and Northern courts had to contribute to the support and protection
of the institution.</p>
<p>This was a degradation which the North would not permit any
longer than until they could get the power to expunge such laws
from the statute books. Prior to the time of these encroachments
the great majority of the people of the North had no particular
quarrel with slavery, so long as they were not forced to have it
themselves. But they were not willing to play the role of police
for the South in the protection of this particular institution.</p>
<p>In the early days of the country, before we had railroads,
telegraphs and steamboats—in a word, rapid transit of any
sort—the States were each almost a separate nationality. At
that time the subject of slavery caused but little or no
disturbance to the public mind. But the country grew, rapid transit
was established, and trade and commerce between the States got to
be so much greater than before, that the power of the National
government became more felt and recognized and, therefore, had to
be enlisted in the cause of this institution.</p>
<p>It is probably well that we had the war when we did. We are
better off now than we would have been without it, and have made
more rapid progress than we otherwise should have made. The
civilized nations of Europe have been stimulated into unusual
activity, so that commerce, trade, travel, and thorough
acquaintance among people of different nationalities, has become
common; whereas, before, it was but the few who had ever had the
privilege of going beyond the limits of their own country or who
knew anything about other people. Then, too, our republican
institutions were regarded as experiments up to the breaking out of
the rebellion, and monarchical Europe generally believed that our
republic was a rope of sand that would part the moment the
slightest strain was brought upon it. Now it has shown itself
capable of dealing with one of the greatest wars that was ever
made, and our people have proven themselves to be the most
formidable in war of any nationality.</p>
<p>But this war was a fearful lesson, and should teach us the
necessity of avoiding wars in the future.</p>
<p>The conduct of some of the European states during our troubles
shows the lack of conscience of communities where the
responsibility does not come upon a single individual. Seeing a
nation that extended from ocean to ocean, embracing the better part
of a continent, growing as we were growing in population, wealth
and intelligence, the European nations thought it would be well to
give us a check. We might, possibly, after a while threaten their
peace, or, at least, the perpetuity of their institutions. Hence,
England was constantly finding fault with the administration at
Washington because we were not able to keep up an effective
blockade. She also joined, at first, with France and Spain in
setting up an Austrian prince upon the throne in Mexico, totally
disregarding any rights or claims that Mexico had of being treated
as an independent power. It is true they trumped up grievances as a
pretext, but they were only pretexts which can always be found when
wanted.</p>
<p>Mexico, in her various revolutions, had been unable to give that
protection to the subjects of foreign nations which she would have
liked to give, and some of her revolutionary leaders had forced
loans from them. Under pretence of protecting their citizens, these
nations seized upon Mexico as a foothold for establishing a
European monarchy upon our continent, thus threatening our peace at
home. I, myself, regarded this as a direct act of war against the
United States by the powers engaged, and supposed as a matter of
course that the United States would treat it as such when their
hands were free to strike. I often spoke of the matter to Mr.
Lincoln and the Secretary of War, but never heard any special views
from them to enable me to judge what they thought or felt about it.
I inferred that they felt a good deal as I did, but were unwilling
to commit themselves while we had our own troubles upon our
hands.</p>
<p>All of the powers except France very soon withdrew from the
armed intervention for the establishment of an Austrian prince upon
the throne of Mexico; but the governing people of these countries
continued to the close of the war to throw obstacles in our way.
After the surrender of Lee, therefore, entertaining the opinion
here expressed, I sent Sheridan with a corps to the Rio Grande to
have him where he might aid Juarez in expelling the French from
Mexico. These troops got off before they could be stopped; and went
to the Rio Grande, where Sheridan distributed them up and down the
river, much to the consternation of the troops in the quarter of
Mexico bordering on that stream. This soon led to a request from
France that we should withdraw our troops from the Rio Grande and
to negotiations for the withdrawal of theirs. Finally Bazaine was
withdrawn from Mexico by order of the French Government. From that
day the empire began to totter. Mexico was then able to maintain
her independence without aid from us.</p>
<p>France is the traditional ally and friend of the United States.
I did not blame France for her part in the scheme to erect a
monarchy upon the ruins of the Mexican Republic. That was the
scheme of one man, an imitator without genius or merit. He had
succeeded in stealing the government of his country, and made a
change in its form against the wishes and instincts of his people.
He tried to play the part of the first Napoleon, without the
ability to sustain that role. He sought by new conquests to add to
his empire and his glory; but the signal failure of his scheme of
conquest was the precursor of his own overthrow.</p>
<p>Like our own war between the States, the Franco-Prussian war was
an expensive one; but it was worth to France all it cost her
people. It was the completion of the downfall of Napoleon III. The
beginning was when he landed troops on this continent. Failing
here, the prestige of his name—all the prestige he ever
had—was gone. He must achieve a success or fall. He tried to
strike down his neighbor, Prussia—and fell.</p>
<p>I never admired the character of the first Napoleon; but I
recognize his great genius. His work, too, has left its impress for
good on the face of Europe. The third Napoleon could have no claim
to having done a good or just act.</p>
<p>To maintain peace in the future it is necessary to be prepared
for war. There can scarcely be a possible chance of a conflict,
such as the last one, occurring among our own people again; but,
growing as we are, in population, wealth and military power, we may
become the envy of nations which led us in all these particulars
only a few years ago; and unless we are prepared for it we may be
in danger of a combined movement being some day made to crush us
out. Now, scarcely twenty years after the war, we seem to have
forgotten the lessons it taught, and are going on as if in the
greatest security, without the power to resist an invasion by the
fleets of fourth-rate European powers for a time until we could
prepare for them.</p>
<p>We should have a good navy, and our sea-coast defences should be
put in the finest possible condition. Neither of these cost much
when it is considered where the money goes, and what we get in
return. Money expended in a fine navy, not only adds to our
security and tends to prevent war in the future, but is very
material aid to our commerce with foreign nations in the meantime.
Money spent upon sea-coast defences is spent among our own people,
and all goes back again among the people. The work accomplished,
too, like that of the navy, gives us a feeling of security.</p>
<p>England's course towards the United States during the rebellion
exasperated the people of this country very much against the mother
country. I regretted it. England and the United States are natural
allies, and should be the best of friends. They speak one language,
and are related by blood and other ties. We together, or even
either separately, are better qualified than any other people to
establish commerce between all the nationalities of the world.</p>
<p>England governs her own colonies, and particularly those
embracing the people of different races from her own, better than
any other nation. She is just to the conquered, but rigid. She
makes them self-supporting, but gives the benefit of labor to the
laborer. She does not seem to look upon the colonies as outside
possessions which she is at liberty to work for the support and
aggrandizement of the home government.</p>
<p>The hostility of England to the United States during our
rebellion was not so much real as it was apparent. It was the
hostility of the leaders of one political party. I am told that
there was no time during the civil war when they were able to get
up in England a demonstration in favor of secession, while these
were constantly being gotten up in favor of the Union, or, as they
called it, in favor of the North. Even in Manchester, which
suffered so fearfully by having the cotton cut off from her mills,
they had a monster demonstration in favor of the North at the very
time when their workmen were almost famishing.</p>
<p>It is possible that the question of a conflict between races may
come up in the future, as did that between freedom and slavery
before. The condition of the colored man within our borders may
become a source of anxiety, to say the least. But he was brought to
our shores by compulsion, and he now should be considered as having
as good a right to remain here as any other class of our citizens.
It was looking to a settlement of this question that led me to urge
the annexation of Santo Domingo during the time I was President of
the United States.</p>
<p>Santo Domingo was freely offered to us, not only by the
administration, but by all the people, almost without price. The
island is upon our shores, is very fertile, and is capable of
supporting fifteen millions of people. The products of the soil are
so valuable that labor in her fields would be so compensated as to
enable those who wished to go there to quickly repay the cost of
their passage. I took it that the colored people would go there in
great numbers, so as to have independent states governed by their
own race. They would still be States of the Union, and under the
protection of the General Government; but the citizens would be
almost wholly colored.</p>
<p>By the war with Mexico, we had acquired, as we have seen,
territory almost equal in extent to that we already possessed. It
was seen that the volunteers of the Mexican war largely composed
the pioneers to settle up the Pacific coast country. Their numbers,
however, were scarcely sufficient to be a nucleus for the
population of the important points of the territory acquired by
that war. After our rebellion, when so many young men were at
liberty to return to their homes, they found they were not
satisfied with the farm, the store, or the work-shop of the
villages, but wanted larger fields. The mines of the mountains
first attracted them; but afterwards they found that rich valleys
and productive grazing and farming lands were there. This
territory, the geography of which was not known to us at the close
of the rebellion, is now as well mapped as any portion of our
country. Railroads traverse it in every direction, north, south,
east, and west. The mines are worked. The high lands are used for
grazing purposes, and rich agricultural lands are found in many of
the valleys. This is the work of the volunteer. It is probable that
the Indians would have had control of these lands for a century yet
but for the war. We must conclude, therefore, that wars are not
always evils unmixed with some good.</p>
<p>Prior to the rebellion the great mass of the people were
satisfied to remain near the scenes of their birth. In fact an
immense majority of the whole people did not feel secure against
coming to want should they move among entire strangers. So much was
the country divided into small communities that localized idioms
had grown up, so that you could almost tell what section a person
was from by hearing him speak. Before, new territories were settled
by a "class"; people who shunned contact with others; people who,
when the country began to settle up around them, would push out
farther from civilization. Their guns furnished meat, and the
cultivation of a very limited amount of the soil, their bread and
vegetables. All the streams abounded with fish. Trapping would
furnish pelts to be brought into the States once a year, to pay for
necessary articles which they could not raise—powder, lead,
whiskey, tobacco and some store goods. Occasionally some little
articles of luxury would enter into these purchases—a quarter
of a pound of tea, two or three pounds of coffee, more of sugar,
some playing cards, and if anything was left over of the proceeds
of the sale, more whiskey.</p>
<p>Little was known of the topography of the country beyond the
settlements of these frontiersmen. This is all changed now. The war
begot a spirit of independence and enterprise. The feeling now is,
that a youth must cut loose from his old surroundings to enable him
to get up in the world. There is now such a commingling of the
people that particular idioms and pronunciation are no longer
localized to any great extent; the country has filled up "from the
centre all around to the sea"; railroads connect the two oceans and
all parts of the interior; maps, nearly perfect, of every part of
the country are now furnished the student of geography.</p>
<p>The war has made us a nation of great power and intelligence. We
have but little to do to preserve peace, happiness and prosperity
at home, and the respect of other nations. Our experience ought to
teach us the necessity of the first; our power secures the
latter.</p>
<p>I feel that we are on the eve of a new era, when there is to be
great harmony between the Federal and Confederate. I cannot stay to
be a living witness to the correctness of this prophecy; but I feel
it within me that it is to be so. The universally kind feeling
expressed for me at a time when it was supposed that each day would
prove my last, seemed to me the beginning of the answer to "Let us
have peace."</p>
<p>The expression of these kindly feelings were not restricted to a
section of the country, nor to a division of the people. They came
from individual citizens of all nationalities; from all
denominations—the Protestant, the Catholic, and the Jew; and
from the various societies of the land—scientific,
educational, religious or otherwise. Politics did not enter into
the matter at all.</p>
<p>I am not egotist enough to suppose all this significance should
be given because I was the object of it. But the war between the
States was a very bloody and a very costly war. One side or the
other had to yield principles they deemed dearer than life before
it could be brought to an end. I commanded the whole of the mighty
host engaged on the victorious side. I was, no matter whether
deservedly so or not, a representative of that side of the
controversy. It is a significant and gratifying fact that
Confederates should have joined heartily in this spontaneous move.
I hope the good feeling inaugurated may continue to the end.</p>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<SPAN name="appendix" id="appendix"></SPAN>
<center>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />