This is from the Daily Telegraph (Macon, Georgia), 18 February 1861, pg.

1, col. 4:


"The name is a good one, and means the same thing the old one did.

Confederate means United, and hence, though a different word is used, the

name is the same in meaning as that of the old government,"--_Griffin Union_.

There is a very important difference in the meaning of the terms

_"united"_ and _"confederate,"_ which it is desirable should be pointed out

and understood. We believe, if the name of the late Republic had been

"Confederate States" and not "_United_ States," the intestine quarrels to

which she fell a victim would in great part have been avoided, and the

country remained at peace. It was the misfortune of the terms "Union" and

"_United_ States," that they conveyed to the Northern mind an idea,

sedulously encouraged by their politicians from first to last, that the

country was literally a _unit_, subordinate in every thing to a central

power, to which it was responsible and amenable for every act of a political

character. Hence, the Northern abolitionist became, in his own fancy,

responsible for the existence or the extension of slavery, and held, as a

corollary, that the Federal Government ought to prohibit both. This

pretension would have never been set up to any great extent, if a just idea

of the character of the government had been conveyed in its very name--if it

had been called for example "The Confederate States"--_i. e._ Sovereign

States (not _united_, merged into, cemented together, or compounded into one

government or sovereignty), but leagued together in a compact or alliance for

mutual support. There is about as much difference, then, between _"united"_

and _"confederate,"_ as there is between an egg nog and a fagot.