deny that rebellion may be both reasonable and justifiable; or that
every subject in the land may be bound in duty to rebel. In such
case the government will be held to have brought about its own
punishment by its own fault. But as government is a wide affair,
spreading itself gradually, and growing in virtue or in vice from
small beginnings--from seeds slow to produce their fruits--it is
much easier to discern the incidence of the punishment than the
perpetration of the fault. Government goes astray by degrees, or
sins by the absence of that wisdom which should teach rulers how to
make progress as progress is made by those whom they rule. The
fault may be absolutely negative and have spread itself over
centuries; may be, and generally has been, attributable to dull,
good men; but not the less does the punishment come at a blow. The
rebellion exists and cannot be put down--will put down all that
opposes it; but the government is not the less bound to make its
fight. That is the punishment that comes on governing men or on
governing a people that govern not well or not wisely.

As Mr. Motley says in the paper to which I have alluded, "No man, on
either side of the Atlantic, with Anglo-Saxon blood in his veins,
will dispute the right of a people, or of any portion of a people,
to rise against oppression, to demand redress of grievances, and in
case of denial of justice to take up arms to vindicate the sacred
principle of liberty. Few Englishmen or Americans will deny that
the source of government is the consent of the governed, or that
every nation has the right to govern itself according to its will.
When the silent consent is changed to fierce remonstrance,
revolution is impending. The right of revolution is indisputable.
It is written on the whole record of our race, British and American
history is made up of rebellion and revolution. Hampden, Pym, and