Mark and Lincoln: And Unfinished Revolution

 

---

---

 
Karl Marx

---

---

 
Th
  e North American Civil War
London, October 20, 1861
For months now, the leading London papers, both weekly and 
daily, have been repeating the same litany on the American Civil 
War. While they insult the free states of the North, they anxiously 
defend themselves against the suspicion of sympathizing with the 
slave states of the South. In fact, they continually write two articles: 
one in which they attack the North, another in which they excuse 
their attacks on the North. Qui s’excuse, s’accuse.
Th
 eir extenuating arguments are basically as follow. Th
 e war 
between North and South is a tariff  war. Furthermore, the war is 
not being fought over any issue of principle; it is not concerned 
with the question of slavery but in fact centers on the North’s lust 
for sovereignty. In the fi nal analysis, even if justice is on the side of 
the North, does it not remain a futile endeavor to subjugate eight 
million Anglo-Saxons by force! Would not a separation from the 
South release the North from all connection with Negro slavery 
and assure to it, with its 20 million inhabitants and its vast terri-
tory, a higher level of development up to now scarcely dreamed of ? 
Should the North not then welcome secession as a happy event, 
instead of wanting to crush it by means of a bloody and futile civil 
war?
Let us examine point by point the case made out by the English 
press.
Th
  e war between North and South—so runs the fi rst excuse—is 
merely a tariff  war, a war between a protectionist system and a free-
trade system, and England, of course, is on the side of free trade. Is 

---

the slave owner to enjoy the fruits of slave labor to the full, or is he 
to be cheated of part of these fruits by the Northern protectionists? 
Th
  is is the question at issue in the war. It was reserved for the Times 
to make this brilliant discovery; the Economist, Examiner, Saturday 
Review and the like have elaborated on the same theme. It is char-
acteristic that this discovery was made not in Charleston, but in 
London. In America everyone knew, of course, that between 1846 
and 1861 a system of free trade prevailed and that Representative 
Morrill only carried his protectionist tariff  through Congress after 
the rebellion had already broken out. Secession did not take place, 
therefore, because Congress had passed the Morrill tariff ; at most, 
the Morrill tariff  was passed by Congress because secession had 
taken place. To be sure, when South Carolina had its fi rst attack of 
secessionism, in 1832, the protectionist tariff  of 1828 served as a 
pretext; but that a pretext is all it was is shown by a statement made 
by General Jackson. Th
  is time, however, the old pretext has in fact 
not been repeated. In the secession Congress at Montgomery,
1
 every 
mention of the tariff  question was avoided, because in Louisiana, 
one of the most infl uential Southern states, the cultivation of sugar 
is based entirely on protection.
But, the London press pleads further, the war in the United States 
is nothing but a war aimed at preserving the Union by force. Th
 e 
Yankees cannot make up their minds to strike off  fi fteen stars from 
their banner.
2
 Th
  ey want to cut a colossal fi gure on the world stage. 
Indeed, it would be quite a diff erent matter if the war were being 
fought in order to abolish slavery. But the slavery question, as the 
Saturday Review, among others, categorically declares, has abso-
lutely nothing to do with this war.
It must be remembered above all that the war was started not 
by the North but by the South. Th
  e North is on the defensive. For 
months it had quietly stood by and watched while the secessionists 
took possession of forts, arsenals, shipyards, customs houses, pay 
offi
  ces, ships, and stores of arms belonging to the Union, insulted 
1  On February 4, 1861, the Congress of Montgomery founded the 
Confederate States of America, with eleven member states under the presi-
dency of Jeff erson  Davis.
2 Th
 is total includes the contested border states that the South also 
 claimed.
128 karl 
marx

---

its fl ag, and took Northern troops prisoner. Th
 e secessionists fi nally 
decided to force the Union government out of its passive stance 
by means of a blatant act of war; for no other reason than this they 
proceeded to bombard Fort Sumter near Charleston. On April 11 
[1861] their General Beauregard had learned in a meeting with 
Major Anderson, the commander of Fort Sumter, that the fort only 
had rations for three more days and that it would therefore have 
to be surrendered peacefully after this period. In order to forestall 
this peaceful surrender the secessionists opened the bombardment 
early the next morning (April 12), bringing about the fall of the 
place after a few hours. Hardly had this news been telegraphed to 
Montgomery, the seat of the secession Congress, when War Minister 
Walker declared publicly, in the name of the new Confederacy, “No 
man can say where the war opened today will end.” At the same time 
he prophesied that before the fi rst of May the fl ag of the Southern 
Confederacy would wave from the dome of the old Capitol in 
Washington and within a short time perhaps also from the Faneuil 
Karl Marx, 1849 
the north american civil war  129

---