the earth has raised permanent islands from the bottom of the ocean, as well as elevated whole continents above their former level; and such, precisely, are the phenomena ascribed to it in the theory.

In the third and last place, the known principle or cause in question, is adequate to produce the phenomena ascribed to it in the theory. In other words, the force of the central heat of the earth, which has raised its solid crust in some instances, or broken through it in the form of volcanos, is sufficient to produce other effects of the same kind and degree. It is, indeed, merely a truism to assert, that the cause which has produced certain effects in some cases, is sufficient to produce them in other cases.

Thus, all the conditions, which have been laid down by the philosophy of induction, in order to distinguish a true theory from a mere hypothesis, are fulfilled by the foregoing-explanation of the phenomena of volcanos and earthquakes. Hence, if that theory be not absolutely or mathematically certain; it rests, at least, on as solid a foundation as most of the best established theories of the inductive sciences.

Akt. VI.—Speech in the Senate of the United States, on the Mission to Domenica, By Hon. Carl Schurz.

Just before the breaking out of the war, Mr. Schurz was a bitter and uncompromising radical. A German by birth, his connection with the Revolution of 1848 made it convenient for him to seek an asylum in this country, and he soon acquired political distinction here. With his war record we are not acquainted, nor is it now of any consequence to us. He has lately distinguished himself as the representative of the party in favor of a true peace founded upon oblivion of past differences, and on this political platform was reelected to the Senate; having been approved by another citizen whose pretensions are said to have been favored by the President, and who was apposed to the removal of political disabolitionists. His present political attitude, therefore, commends him to the favorable notice of the South. The speech now under consideration was delivered in opposition to a pet scheme of the President, for the annexation to the United States of Domenica, the Spanish portion of the Island of Hispaniola, now better known as Hayti.

Mr. Schurz objects to the annexation of St. Domingo, not because of its population per se, though of that he entertains no high opinion. He founds his opposition on a law of nature,— on the incompatibility of a tropical climate with republican institutions, and by consequence on the danger to the institutions of this country, from the addition of tropical countries to its political state. He appeals to history. Nowhere in the tropics, he says, has history ever presented the spectacle of a republic founded upon the right of the people to govern themselves. We do not wish to take unnessary exceptions to Mr. Schruz's statements; but we would respectfully suggest, that such a spectacle has been as rare in the temperate zone as it is in the trppics, and never to our knowledge in any zone but by persons of our race. The history of other races is to us rather a subject of intelligent curiosity than of instniction. With the exception of the Southern portion of Arabia, and of a portion of the peninsula of Hindustan, there is no portion of the tropics in the Eastern Hemisphere which is occupied by our race, and, unless our information deceives us, those countries are not better governed without than within the tropics; and in the Western Hemisphere the same may be said to be true. The European population in the tropics of America is overpoised by the numerical superiority of inferior races. The argument from history is not convincing, because it is not the history of our race.

But not content with the history of tropical countries, he draws an argument from the condition of the semi-tropical territory of the United States; it is on this portion of his argument that we propose to dwell; and, for the better examination of it, let Mr. Schruz first speak for himself.

‘ Do you want any further addition to the historical experiences I have stated? Look, Senators, to our own country. There is not one of us, who is not perfectly acquainted with the diiferences which existed between the North and the South before slavery was abolished, and which exist yet. \Ve were living under the same political constitution, the two sections of the count: y were peopled by the same race; and yet, while in the North the dignity of labor asserted itself with instincts and impulses of enterprise, of enlightenment, of education, of social and political equality, of a progressive civilization, of free government, the South developed the rule by force of the strong over the weak, and a social and political system, in which the elevation of labor, the peaceful friction of opinion on all matters of public interest, and the tendency to raise by general education all classes to the highest attainable level, had no place. And to this was added a voluntary tendency lurking like a chronic disease. Is not that so? You will say 'it was slavery. Yes, it was slavery, but it was not slavery alone. The North, too, had slavery once; but the North abolished it at an early day. Why? Because it was not profitable there, is the current reply. `Why was it not proiitable there? Simply for the reason that the conditions and circumstances of labor and production in the North were not congenial to slavery, and naturally developed a public sentiment and a social system hostile to the degradation of labor. . . . While slavery could not maintain itself at' the North, why did it maintain itself at the South? Simply because in a hotter climate natural causes developed those passions and prqaensities of human nature, w/tic/1. in the gratification of its appetites, lead to the arbitrary employment ty”

force, in preference to'a just recognition of the riy/its of others.

That was the reason of it. Thus slavery was, after all, not the primary, it was only an intermediate, cause ot the difference that existed between Northern and Southern society. That primary cause lies deeper ,' and you will see in future developements that that primary cause is working still. . . . I say without fear of refutation, that our civil war was not a mere historical accident; but a conytiet between two diferent currents of civilization developed under diferent natural causes. And these diferent currents ha/ve not ceased to run yet!

\Ve suspend our quotations for the purpose of making a few comments on what has already been quoted ; and first of those passages which are marked. President Davis .repeatedly asserted, and asserted truly, that slavery was not the cause of our seccssion; and now we have the corroborating testimony of hir. Schurz. Now, if the cause of the secession was a natural cause, were we not perfectly right in acting in obedience to the dictates of nature? We made no war upon the North. We urgently tried to go off in peace; but our prayers were rejected. If we acted in obedience to the dictates of nature did not Mr. Schurz and his associates act the part of fanatics and tyrants when they opposed our action? If nature has planted in the two sections of the country social, moral, and political instincts so diametrically opposed, so hostile to each other, was not a separation called for in the instincts of humanity and of peace 3 If no man may put asunder those whom God has joined together, how can we presume to hold together' those whom the same God has directed to live asunder? The Confederate States were anxious to remove the obstacles to a permanent peace on the continent. They withdrew from a league which had always been one of convenience merely, not of love, for the mutual dislike of the two sections manifesteditself 'even before the government of Britain was shaken od. The South obeyed the instincts of nature, and the North, with its boasted higher civilization, waged a war of destruction against them. to reduce them to submission; and with what result? Let Mr. Schruz answer: ‘ When we complain of the turbulent state of society there (at the South) we mistake the nature of the case, if we ascribe the whole evil exclusively to the traditions of slavery, or the usual irregularities of life in thinly settled countries. These things certainly have aggravated the evil, but' they have not produced it. They are rather symptoms than causes. Look over the globe, and study the history and present condition ot nations, and you will End similar things more or less developed in all hot countries: the people passionate and of a turbulent disposition, and more inclined to appeal to force than to patient argument, and averse to orflerly acquiescence in deciding con

JlicU of opinion and interest. And thus it will gradually become painfully evident to us here that as it was not the existence of slavery alone which produced our differences before, so it will not be the traditions of slavery alone that will foment our differences hereafter. The natural influences I have been describing, will inevitably assert themselves. Let us look at our future. These natural influences breed chronic distempers, which I fear will still keep the body politic of this republic in uneasy agitation for a long time to come. They will require judicious and prudent treatment. A wise policy may indeed prevent violent paroxysms, but—and here I express my sincerest convictions, startling as the proposition may seem—/ doubt whether we shall ever be able to become completely m asters of the disease. We shall have reason to congratulate ourselves if we succeed by prudent management in repressing its most violent symptoms, and in securing to the South a tolerable state of order, without giving to this government too dangerous a measure of arbitrary power.'

We congratulate Mr. Schurz and his associates on the happy issue of their policy. They deliberately made war upon nature to retain the South in subjection to them, (we protest against the idea of restoring the Union—the passage just quoted proves . conclusively that he at least does not believe it restored,) and they hope by the exhibition of great prudence, (prudence in a Congress armed with irresponsible power!) to maintain their conquests, in peace and order, without giving to their government too dangerous a meas ure of arbitrary power. That it has acquired that arbitrary power he does not pretend to deny; he only hopes that it will not be too dangerous. It was predicted from the first by sagacious persons, both North and South, that a successful attempt to coerce the States of the South would result in the destruction of the political liberties of the whole. Mr. Schurz admits that it is true of the South; and keenly dreads it for the North. Dismiss your fears, Mr. Schurz, the mischief has been done. The North knows it not yet, because the government is still carried on in its interests; as for the South, it is to be kept for its own good in humble subjection to the North.

t