Newspaper Page Text
WASHINGTON: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1863.
Weekly National I nlelllyenter. + By GALES & BEATON. JAMBS 0. WKLUNU, AhSOClATK KDITOR. The subscription price of this paper fur a year is Two Dollars, payable in advance. A reduction of 20 percent.(one-fifth of the full charge * will be made to any one who ahull order and pay for, at on< time, ten copies of the Weekly paper ; and a reduction o( ~ > per cent, (or one-fmrth of the full charge) to any o& who will order and pay (or, at one time, twenty or more copies. No accounts being kept for this paper, it will not be sent tj any one unless paid tor in advauce, nor any longer tbai> the time for which it is paid. " UNPRACTICAL DISSENSIONS." The Boston Daily Advertiser, in oomtnentingon certain dissensions which have arisen among the loyal supporters of the Government in Maryland, and after expressing the opinion that these dissen sions, notwithstanding the heat that has been en geoderod by the friction of adverse organizations, relate to differences which are more theoretical than praotical, proceeds to remark as follows: "This singula) ly unpractical quarrel, over a matter wbicb is fa-t ceasing to be worth quarrelling about, is not uulike the great*"- disputes which divide many true friends of the Union. The coutrovi*rny still goes i n as to the legal grounds of emancipation, the effect of the proclamation and it< authority. Meanwhile, however, slavery itselt is PMisbing by no slow proccf*. The proclamation is a dead tter and acciinplisbes the freedom of no slave?says one; but mean tim*, by the att< ition of war, the system against which the ^reclamation is directed is crumbling away. The right of the in-utgent States to maintain slavery after the return of peace is a theme of constant discussion with another; and yet, as htfnirs now so, there will soon be no slave* to he kept iu slavery. ' While we sleep the grass grows.' While the l< yal are discusoing such points?one would ray out of pure love of bbatractioos?the great ques tion of the time is settling Itself. The inevitable match of events is taking away Iroin among us the subject of our chief controversies, mid dieporing of the vast problem, at wbicb human power stumbles and falls, in such form as suits the great de-igna if an all-wise Providence." There is a great deal of truth and philosophy itf this view, and if all the professed friends of the Government in the present crisis were as discreet and moderate as the Advertiser, we presume there would be little occasion for fruitless dissensions about " unpractical questions" relating to " the proclamation of freodoui" or " the leg vl grounds of emancipation ." So entiie'y do we share this opinion that some months ago?it was on the 18th of last March?wo refemd to this difficult and vexatious topic of controversy in the following terms: " It distinctly appears that whatever injury tbe institu tion of slavery shall receive in the war, it will be an in jury lesulting from Ihe actual havoc of military opera r ens or from tbe shock of arms distuibing for a time tbe s.v?*l arTangi ii.rtBts of every community whose soil is Rmde the u Obire of conflict. And since antUalavery or . us like ihe N"W York Tribune have come to adopt tbe ? i'Wh ootiS'Hftt t!y entertained on thia topic by conserva tive jou * ii<i . s. it becomes a question witb tbe latu-r equally wjih t*ie firmer whether the ao-calhd ' proclnma tw n of freedom can any longer be said to present a point of difference or of controversy between thnae wLo alike profess to uphold the Government in tbe present crisis. Iu fact, the 'proclamation' has not been found to be any thing moie than a dead letter, and as suth it has been buried out of sight by the actuslities of the vivid struggl in which the country is engaged. If, iu tbe estimation of tho?e who were the original friends of tbe 'new policy,' the country derives from it no aid iu prosecuting the war, let not its tpponents set k t> endow it with an imaginary vitality merely for tbe aake of embarrassing the Govern ment A ' war measure' which has proved so inopera tive and void needs only to be couibatted on the ground of tbe theoretical principles wbicb it impugn*, for it create* do issue outside of political aud constitutional polemics." ' But when it is attempted to convert the " pr - ?lamation of freedom " from a means into an end, and when political theorists like Mr. Whiting would endow it with vitality only for the pur pose of wsging in its name a war agaiost the Con atitution and the Uaion, it is evident that thot>e who were ready with us to pretermit the discussion of an "unpractical topic" oan no longer ignore the new and very practical issues which it is sought to spring upon the country under the cover of this proclamation. For these new insues, if once engrafted on tho policy of the war, would tend to accumulate insuperable obstacles in the way of restoring the Union, as their very sugges tion has already done immense damage to the na tional cause, by endowing the insurgents with fresh arguments for u firing the Southern heart" and new motives for persisting in the oonfiiet, since, ?t the won t, thry can be no more than subjugated? a prospcct which is tho Lest that the revolutionary theory has to offer to tho tntire people of the South, without regard to their personal or indi ?idual opiniots in the past or their engagements for the future. The Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser, in publish ing, as it did, the whole of Mr. Solioitor Whiting's letter upon the " conditions of re-union," accom panied it with the following suggestion : " If there is a man in the Cunfedeiacy in favor of the rerotisliuct on of the Union, let him lead Ibis letter and aee bis d<?in. S'at* Inns are to be obliterate, State rights ignored, public, and private pmp>rty and interest I swept away, the in* n of the South, rich and p-mr, with their wivs and littfo ones, are to be wide tbe servant of servants." Now, we hold that any theory of action whioh thus puts arguments into the mouths of Southern ? disunionists and places weapons in thoir hands, is a theory which becomes terribly practic if, and whioh tbe friends of the Union are called by every consideration of duty to deplore, and, deploring, to resist by all means in their power. THE CONNECTICUT TOWN ELECTIONS. The Hartford Times says: " fe'o far aa we have received returns, tbe Democrats have done well in tbe town elec tions, better than in any fall for tbe past eight years.'? The Tim* s, in ita issue of WedntsJay, states the results in ninety-three towns, of wbicb fifty have gone Democratic and forty-three Republican. The New Haven Palladium claims fifty-five towns for tbe Republicans out of one bun* dred towns hi aid from THE VINTAGE IN FRANCE. From tbe Paris (Jonatitutionnel we learn that tbe vin tage in Francc, "now nearly over in the south, proceeding briskly in tbe central departments, and about shortly to oomutece in the environ* of Pari*." promises to be a good aversge as regarda quantity, and superior in quality to that of last year. Before 1H48 the witM.proAjoed in Frsnce was estimated at forty mil0?A hectolitres); It is said to be now filty millions.. According to the Cmtitu tionnel, nit hi ugh the different treaties of uonrtuerm con eluded since lr'CO h>.ve greatly' encou ased ihe vine grower, they have cot yet much enlarged Bis sale for for N* MMCfctts. ^ 4 .. . .-s ??. ,;?SvO: :i ,t ,s A y. MB. SUMNER'S ARGUMENT. The nader of the eloquent speech delivered by Postmaster General Blair, at the meeting held at Ilock vi He on the diet ultimo, will remember that a large portion of it was directed to the con demnation of an article whioh appeared in the last number of the Atlantic Monthly. He signal ized the paper ai baring struck " the key-note of revolution"?that i?, the "sheer abolition of State Constitutions in the regit n suffering under the rod of rebellion " Mr. Blair held that " the article in the Atlantic Monthlj may justly be quoted ae the programme of the movement. It presents," he adds, " the issue on which the Abolition party has resolved to rest its hopes of setting up its domination in this country," and to this " programme" he plaoed in opposition " that whioh is presented by President Linooln." It is known to our readers that the article whioh is thus arraigned by a member of the President's Cabinet proceeds from Mr. Sumner, the distin guished Senator from Massachusetts. Mr. Blair represents that there is a grave dissidenoe betwetn the Senator and the President on this point, and that the former has direotly arrayed himself against the latter on a question of fundamental polioy in the conduct of the war. That there is a dircct antagonism between the programme of Mr. Sumner and that of the President will be denied by none. Indeed, Mr.1 Sumner opens his article with a strong protest against the policy hitherto pursued by the Pn si dent in the oivil management of the distriots re claimed from the power of the insurgents. He arraigns that policy in the following terms : " tour Military Governors have been already appointed : one lor Tennessee, one for Soutb Carolina, one lor North Ctrohna, and the other for Louisiana, t-o far as ia known the appointment of each waa by a simple letter from the Secretary of War. But if Ibis can be dmie in four Staten where in the limit T It may be done in every rebel State and it not in every other State in the Union, it will be ?imply because the existence of a valid State Government excluded the exercise of this extraordinary power. But assuming that, as our armies prevail, it will be done in every rebel SUte, we sha'1 then have elttcn Military Gov ernora, all deriving their authority from one ronrce, ru!iug a populat on amounting to upwards of nine millions. Aud this imperatorial dominion, indefinite in extent, will alto be indefinite in duration; for if, under the Constitution and laws, it be proper to constitute such Governors, it is clear that they may be ooolibued.without regard to time? for yeara, if you please, aa Wr|| as for weeks?and the whole region which they are called to sway will be a mili tary empire, with all the powers, executive, legislative, and even judical, derived from one man in Washington. lslk of the 'one man power.' Here it is with a veng-ance. Talk of military rule. Here it is, in the name of a Repub lic. 1 be bare sUteme-it of this cane may put us on our guard. We may well heaitate to organise a single State under a military government, when we see where such a step will lead. If you approve one you must appiove all, and the Nat onal Government may erystallize into a mili tary despotism." It will be seen that, like every man having strong convictions of duty and independent views of pub lic policy, Mr. Sumner does not oonstrue it to be his function to accept in all things the initiative of the Kxecutive. lie njccts, and properly re ject*, the slavish dogma that an Amerioan citizen in a time of war, anymore than in a time of peaoe, is bound to support " the Administration in all its measures and in all its departments," and he gives pjoof of the faith that is in him by impeach ing an important part of the political and military oonduct of the President. W e do not arraign him for thus opposing the Administration in a matter where he dissents, and we are sure honestly dissents, from the course of the 1 resident. It is his right as a citizen of the United States to oanvass all the measures of the 1 resident, and to bring them, as he does in this article, to the test of " reason and expediency," as he understands them. And his right under this head is neither more nor less than that of every other American freeman, however inferior the great ma.*s of the President's oountrymen may be to Mr. Sumner in the learning which tbcj bring to the investigation of such questions. But, as on this question we sustain the policy of the President against the attacks of Mr. Sumner, we propose in a few words to give some of the reasons why we feel it our duty to do so. The aubstanoe of the theory he advooates is stated by Mr. Sumner in the following terms : " It is enough, that, for the time b- ing, and in the ab sence of a loyal Government, they [the ? Kehel Htates'] can take no part and perform no function in the Union, s<> that they cannot be recognised by the National Govern ment. Tt.e reason ia plain. There are in these Htate.. no local functionaries bound by constitutional oaths, so that, lu fact, there are no constitutional functionaries ; and since tbe Htate Government is necessarily composed of such functionaries, there can be no Htate Government. Thus for instance, in Soutb Carolina. Pickens an<t bis associates may rail themselves the Governor and Legislature, and in Virginia, Letcher ai d his associates may call themselves Governor and Legislature; but we cannot reeognise th m a* such. The refore, to all pretensions in behalf of SUte Governments in the nbel States. I oppose the simple fact that for tbe time being no such Governments exist. The r"06, ?>y those Governments ae deTr.r^ r^ i ? And tbe whole reb <l region, deprived if atf local government, lapaes under the exclu sive jurisdiction of Congress, preoiseiy as any other terri tory , or. in other words, the lifting of the lo^al govern ments leaves^ the whole vast regi,* without an? other tbM tbe President tbould undertake to govern it by military power, starting as r,PreifcJ,y "U Who believe leas th an a*k!na U ?rill ' ^ ?aa than a king, u willappear, ,n careful consideration, if, be aa well founded in the Conatitutron aa it ia atmi.le ami natural, while it affords an easy and couatitutioual Lut.ori to onr present embarrassments." Now, we conoeive that all that Mr. Sumner says about "8tate Governments" in the iosurgent dis tricts may be admitted without involving the con clusion whioh ho reaches as to the Statea them* selves. Whoever assails the Union Is a trai tor personally and individually, and when the au thorities of a State Government take up arms against the Union it is not neoessarily the State whioh is in rebellion, but a body of treasonable in dividuals, whose act does not destroy the rights or alter the position dr annnl the existcnoe of the State. This latter still remaids, in contemplation of constitutional law, a member of the political <^ganiration of the Union. . . j ? It is plain that the difference Which Obtains kmoog several of the political disputant Vu this question aptings from a oonfusion of ideas, which is either the oause or the effect of a confusion oi terms. It is Dot denied that, in the eye of the Constitution, the State Governments of the Se eded States, as at present administered by men sworn to support a Constitution alien to the Consti tution of the United States, have ceased to exist de facto. The functionaries of these Governments are civilly dead, but for all this the State is not deid. If a worse than Oriental plague should sweep away all the officials of the State Government of Delaware, it would not be pretended that tht Slate of Delaware had thereby beoome extinct, though the catastrophe might involve the necessity of resorting ah intejro to the primary source of all politioal power for the purpose of re-imtalling a State Government. As was well said by the New York Evening Pogt when the theory of Mr. Sum ner was first broached in the Senate of the United States : " A destruction aa sudden a* that which fell upon the boat* of 8enuacherib might befall Governor Morgan, all the State officera, and all the member* of the Legislature, and jet the Stite of New York would coritioue to be. One-half or uine-tentba of the people might be carried off by a pestilence, and jet the remainder would constitute the State of New York. Nay, a foreign conqueat m'ght disperse the Government at Albany, and prevent the peo ple from aasembling in any mode for a considerable time, and yet the State of New York would revive a< soou an 'hu conqueror withdrew. Nothing short of a perpetual subjugation, or the eutire merger of the political society in another, would destroy the existence of the State." There is but one way in which a State mry be terminated " under the Constitution," and that is by the joint consent of Congress and the Legisla ture of the State or States conoerned- Delaware, for instance, which is a State of the Union, might merge itself into Pennsylvania, another State of the Union, by act of Congress and of the two State Legislatures, and there would be thereafter no State of Delaware; its existence as a State would be terminated. Wc know of no other way io which a State can be constitutionally extinguish d. And here we might rest our argument. For, if this position be well taken, it leaves Mr. Sumner no ground on which to base his theory. But let ma look more particularly to what he calls the " sources of Congressional power" over the while insurgent district for the organization of civil governments within it on the ruins of tho States He finds the well heads of this immense power in " three fountains, generous and hospitable," ex isting " in the Constitution ready for the ocoa sion." We think it will not be difficult to show that these source*, instead of being exuberant fountains, are really empty wells, into which Mr. Sumner has thrown his polished bucket and drawn nothing up. Let us examine them. He derives his first inference in favor of this Congressional power from " the necessity of the oase." He says: "Ex uecetiitnle ret, Congress must have juriadictioo over every portion of the United Mtatea where thire it no other Government; and since in the present caae there ia no other Government, the whole region falls within the jurisdiction of Congreaa. This jurisdiction is incident, if you pletse, to that cuardianabip and eminent domain which belong to the United Htat^a with regard t> all its territory and the people thereof, and it comes into activity when the local government reasea to exist It can be questioned only in the name of the local government; but sinoe thi? government has disappeared in the rebel States the jurisdiction of Congress is uninterrupted there. The whole broad rebel region is tabula rata or ' a clean slate,' where Cougreas, under the Constitution of the United States, may write the laws." Now, with all respect to the distinguished Senator, we submit that this proposition is a mere petitio principii. It begs the very question in dispute. This will be apparent from the authority he cites in defence of his principle, when he im mediately proceeds to say : " In adopting this principle, I follow the authority of the Fupreme Court of the United States in determining the Jurisdiction of Congress over the Territories. Here are the words of Chief Jua'ice Marshall: " ' Perhapa the power ot governing a Territory belonging to the United Ktates, wLirh has not, by becoming a State, acquired the means of sell-government, may reault neces aarily from the facta that it is not within the jurisdiction of any paiticular State, and is within the power and juria diction of the United States. The ri ;ht to govern may he the natural const quence of the right to acqu.rte territory.'" Now, who docs not peroeive that this doctane of Chief Justice Marshall applies only to territory btlonyiny to the United Sfalet which hit not be come a Statet But the whole territory within which the insurrection now temporarily prevails has been oncc partitioned into States, and the question at issue is, whether these States have oeased, in law or fact, to exist, beoause the State Governments are, for the time being, suspended and disturbed? 'J be whole insurgent territory lies "within the jurisdiction of particular States," and is, therefore, cxcrpted from the scope of this judicial diclvm, which, moreover, as Mr. Sumner is aware, had reference when origiually uttered by Judge Marshall to the single question then pend iag before the Supremo Court The second source of the power ascribed by Mr. Sumner to Congre*s for the civil government of the insurgent territory is found in tho "rights of wir." To this effect he says : " They are the powers conceded by civilized society to nations at war, known as the right* of war, at onee multi tudini in and minute, vast and various It would be strarge if Congress could organize armies and navies to conquer, and could not also organise governments to pr.> ?ect. l*e Tocqueville, who saw our institutions with so keen an eye, remarked, that, since, in apite of all political fiction*, tne preponderating' power resided in the S'ate Uov. rnment-, and not in Hie National Government, a civil war here ' w< uld be nothing but a foreign war in dis gnisa.' Of course the natural consequence would be to give the National Government in such a c.ivl war all the right* which it would have in a foreign war " To this position of Mr. Sumner wo oppose tli* cogent argumentation of Judge Spraguc, of the United States District Court sitting at Boston, when called to treat this very question, considered M one growing out of the jurisdiction exercised by the United States, jure. lnlli} in cases arising under admiralty law. In tho oase of the Amy Warwick, Judge Spraguo said : " It has been supposed that if the Government have the rights nt a belligerent, then, after the rebellion it tupprttted. if inil have ti e rtghlt ?/ rontfuetl; that a State anil ill inhmbilanlt may be p,rmanent/p diverted pf all ptUitifal privilege? and treated at foreign terrxtorf or quired hf armt Thi* it sa error?a grare and daugtrout trior. Conqu-st of a foreign country give* absolute and unlimited aove re?en rights. Hut no nation orer maket anrh a eom/M'tt of iff otrn territory. If a ho*UI? Power, either from without or witbiu a nation, takea poaeesainti and holds absolute do minion over any portion of its territory, and the nation by lore? of arms expels or overthrew* the enemy, and sup presses hostilities, it acquires no new title, but merely re |tiin the poiieiiiuo of which it hod been temporarily de prived The nation acquires no new sovereignty, but merely to maintain itt previous rights." This logio seems to ua unanswerable, and it dries up completely the fountain of power which Mr. Sumner seeks to find in the jus btlli. It is left to oonsider the only remaining foun tain. This he discovers in that olause of the Constitution which provides that "the United States shall guaranty to every State in this Union a republican form of government and shall pro tect each of them against invasion." But does not Mr. Sumner peroeive that this very olause ex cludes his whole theory by rendering it impossible? How oan Congress guaranty to "every State in this Lnion a republican form of government/' when, according to Mr. Sumner's views, certain States havo oeased to exist as States ? This olause of the Constitution, if nothing else were found in that instrument, would be fatal to his dootrine. And let us listen to Mr. Madison's exposition of this clause in the 43d number of the Federalist. He there says: " It may po?sibly be asked what need there could be of surb a precaution, and whether it may not btcome a pre text for alterations t* the 8 tat a Governments without th? concurrence of the States themselves. These questions ad mit of ready answers. If the interposition of the General Government should not be needed the provision for such an ?vent will be a harmless superfluity only in the Consti tufion. But who can say what experiments may be pro duced by the caprice of particular States, by the ambition of enterprising leaders, or by the intriguea and influence of foreign Powers 7 To tbe second question it may be an swered that if the Geueral Government should interpose by virtue of this constitutional authority it will be of course bound to pursue the authority. But the authority ext nda no f*rther than to a guaranty of a republican form of go vr.rnment, WHICH SUPPOSES A PRE-EXISTING GOVEKN MENT OP THE PORM WHICH IS TO BE GUARANTIED." Could any language be more explicit or mor conolusive against the purpose for which Mr. Sumner has cited this provision of the Constitution ? The text and the comment are alike plain. And yet it is of sources such as this and the two pre viously indicated that the distinguished Senator says: " In reviewing these three sources of power, I know not which i* most complete. Either would be ^ample alone; but the three together are three times ample. rhu<, out of this triple fountain, or, if y u please, by this triple cord, do I vindicate the power of Congress over the vacated rebel States." We are very willing to let the decision of this question turn on any one or all three of t^ese con siderations. And we may bo sure that Mr. Sum ner has made the most that can be made of them. If he has failed, as we oonoeive he has, to find in any one, or in all three oombined, the slightest support for his theory, it has been from no want of ingenuity on his part, but because of the intrinsic difficulties of the theory itself, which docs not admit of successful defenoe, even in hia skillful hands. MARYLAND POLITICS. As Maryland is the parent Stato from whoso side the District of Columbia wap taken, we natu rally fetl a more vivid and immediate interest in her political affairs than in those of any other State, and therefore bestow upon them a larger space in our columns. Accordingly the reader will find in another part of to-day'a Intelligenoer a oopy of the address issued by the Hon. Charles B. Calvert, an able, independent, and efficient member of the last House -of Representatives, an nouncing himself to the voters of the Fifth Con gressional District of Maryland as a candidate for re-election. Like all that prooeeds from Mr. Cal vrrt, this letter will be found to bear the marks of frankness and courage in the enunciation of his opinions, and, if taken in oonnexion with the hon orable manner in which he discharged his repre sentativc functions during the last Congress, will go far to establish his claim to the continued con fidence of all in the diatriot who wish to combine in their Representative the quality of indepen dence with a firm and unswerving support of tho Government in all constitutional measures looking t) the maintenance of the rightful authority of the Government over the Insurgent States. It is known that Mr. Calvert has two competi tors?one supported as the candidate of a so-called "Union Convention" lately assembled at Bladens burg, and the other being a nominee of the Demo cratic party. A respectful petition addressed by tbe latter to the President of the United States will be found elsewhere in to-day's paper. OENERAL MeCLELLAN. A letter from the army of tbe Potomac says that for s> in" days an addresa tas been widely circulated through the aruiy, soliciting a ten ceut subscription for a memorial of esteem to be prevented to M?j. Gen. McClellan. Par tie* who subscribed bad tbeir money returned to tbem jesterday, and were informed that the design had been abandoned. The aunexed circular explains the matter. Tbe sub scription, it is stated, "was almost universal in the army of tbe Potomac, but the pressure from the War Depart ment was a<? strong against it that it had to be suspended. Gen. Meade beaded the list with twenty dollars, a hand s?me i ubtcripli >n." CIRCULAR. The object of the proposed testimonial from the army of the Potomac to Major General MoClellan having been misconstrued, and the proceeding being considered aa contrary army regulations, it H deemed proper, for tbese reasons, by ntsny who have united to it, to prooeed no further in tbe mntutr. S ptemker 24, 1HW. By Ihe way, we, in common with our contemporaries published on Wednesday a telegraphic despatch from Pbila. delpbia, stating that Oen. McClellan bad arrived iu that city on a visit to his mother, and was e< mphmented with a serenade on Tuesday night, for which he returned his thanks in a neat addreas. Our readers will pl.as? to ao far correct that despatch aa to ouiit the "nest addreas," m we peroeive by the Philadelphia papers that tbe General was absent from hia mother's residence at the time of the serenade, of which fact sh* duljr informed his friends The repor er, we suppo e, hearing of the serenade, took it for granted that a speech followed the compliment. GENERALS IN THE NEXT CONGRE8S. The following-named officers will, It is stated, leave the army on the 1st of December to take their seata in Ihe United States House of Representatives : Gen. Roneit C. Hcbenck, third district,Ohio ; Gen. John A Garfield, nine? te<>i>tb district, Ohio; Gen. Ehent-xer Dumont, sixth <iis tricf, Indiana; Gen. Greeu Clay Smith, sixth district, Kentucky ; Gen. Ben. F. Loan, seventh distriet, Missouri; Geu Franci* P. Plair, first district, Missouri. POLITICAL DUTY IN A TIME OF WAH. It is common to hear it said in the political dis cussions of the present time that it is the duty ol all true patriots to postpone discussions which im ply or raise a question as to the expediency or con stitutionality of any measure which may be adop'cd by the Administration for the purpose ot u putting down the rebellion." We are told that every blow struck at the measurta of the Administration, though designed, it may be, to effect only a change of policy, really in its effect affords praotical aid and oomfort to the insurgeut*. Thcro should, be, therefore, an uuhesitating and an unquestioning ac quiescence in the rightfulness and in the expedi enoy of any and every measure which may have, or appear to have, the sanction of the Executive? it being understood that this republican domes tioation of the maxim that the President oan do no wrong is only constructively and temporarily true, bciug limited in point of faot by the consideration that he may actually commit mistakes, but no body should say so, and being bounded in point ot time by the admission that this implied doferenoe to the initiative of our rulers is to last only so long as the insurrection lasts. When the war is at an end, the nation, it is said, may again safely resume the habit of political investigation and discussion. Wo have never argued against this theory of oivil duty. It does not rise to the height of any t'ling like argument, for those who hold it betray A servility or an indifferentism which proves them lacking in the first elements of political manhood. Politioal manhood consists in proving all things and holding fast to that which is good not giving rise to vain janglings and contentions which min ister only to strife, but exercising that intelligent and thoughtful and candid inquiry which becomes all good citizens of a Republic, who, as sharers in the common weal, cannot lawfully shirk the respon sibility with which they are invested any more than their rulers. As those who aecept this doctrinc of political quietism in a time of storm and pressure arc men who will be more influenced by example than by precept, we take the liberty cf recalling for their admonition the precedent set by President Lincoln when, as a member of Congress during the war with Mexioo, he was oalled to sit in judgment on the acts of the Executive during a time of war. In a speech delivered in the House of Represen tatives on the 12th of January, 1848, Mr. Lincoln | stated that for a season he had abstained from ex pressing any opinion " as to whether or not the war was justly commenced on the part of the l're siitnt of the United States," and he added that he would have continued to do so 14 were it not that the President himself and some of his friends would not permit those to bo silent who wished to be so upon that question." Mr. Lincoln then pro ceeded to explain that "every silent vote given in favor of supplies for the war" had been oonstrucd by the President and his friends into " an approval of his conduot in the commencement of it, and oj his mode of protecuting the tear," and that there fore men who might otherwise bavo been willing to remain silent were " compelled in justioc to themselves to speak out and prevent, if possible, this kind of misrepresentation." lie thereupon proceeded to criticise, with much severity, the statements contained in the message of President Polk as communicated to Congress, without seem ing to be aware that in controverting the positions or policy of the President he was giving any " aid or oomfort to the enemy,'' though this was a charge which Mr. Polk did not hesitate to bring against all dissentients from the dominant policy of the Administration then charged with the conduct of the war Instead of following blindly the lead of the Administration of President Polk in a time of war, Mr Lincoln rather conceivcd it to be bis duty as a patiiot to address the President in the subjoined style of eloquent adjuration and indig nant protest. We quote from the Congre^ional Globe of the first session Thirtieth Congress, page 156: "He (Mr. I incoln) now declared here, that if by party zeal, if by li.tenicg to reprcaentationa which were erroncoua, be had been iridm-ed to au(.po.e wt.at wan not true in relation ?o t> i* Meaiean aettlrment east, of the Kin (iran 'e ? if the Preaident * ould come forward frai.kly and give then. fact., not argument, remembe.i. g ?** where Wa.hirg'on aat, and armwering an \\ sailing < n would b?ve answered?remembering that a nation should j,ot be ?vadrd, that tbe Almighty wou'd i ot he?and would ?h<>w that be aent the army mm ng a pe. pe a< knowledge allegiance to ua on the oaatern Kio Giande?it be wi-uld ?h"W thia by fart*, he (M ' ) Mould b* moat happy to reverae hia \ote. He would go the other way?wou'd go with bun. B?< if h. could nut, or wo?U not; if ?? ??' or no Dretenee he refused to do it. he (Mr. L.) E ??...?<* of ?W b- 1.1 r. .W. ? the Fr?.id.pt w.. Cl. eply .b'" " "IS'i ; ' ?'?< h"v-h"1 ???""' rr whit i wa. he would not now atop to ir.qu.re-tor in ri ft-yrss ras r r I?* hv dire ting the attention ..f the nation, by filing the puhlia eye upon Military glory-that rainbow that ri.- a m V ilr. ..f bl.HKl that M?rpeutB eye t"at chaiuia but to destroy ? and thua calculating, had plunged into Una war, . i .inled m to the eai>? by which Mexico could b" M,buu. d/ho found himself at last he knew not * here. ??Whoever carefully examined thia laat mesaage would find that like one in the half inaane incitement ..I a fevered dream, in one place the Preaident ?aid lhat Mexi co has nothing but land; iu another part, he rx.ects t? ?upp..rt the army by military eontnbutiona. And again, rhit the war ia waged for the good of Mexico, to prevent foreign mlerferei.ee; that it ia for lb* honor ot thS nation, and particularly for security lor the future. In *n thor place, thit, with the inception of territorial iodeninit). (here u no ..bj ot f..r the war ; and, alter aay.ng thia. he proposra that we should take by act of Congress all he nak^d for indemnity laat fall, and the whole province of California besides; take all, according to his own sUite meut.that we a.e fighting for, and atill to hght on It that was really all he wanted, why did ?tOot^curto h,m that when we had got it we ahould atop? He talked like an insane nmn. He did not propose lo give Mexico any credit at all for the country we had already ^'V^' - he propoaed to take more than be ask. d laat tall, all t not give her any credit, but to hght on. ?' In another place we are told that we mint have in demnity tor the expenaea of the war. It waa .trange that it did not occur to the P.eaidei.t that it would be a little difficult to get indemnity after the expen?ea had tranarended in am unt the whole value of hei tern ory. hbe bad nothing but land, the Preaident tol ? ua, and, atu r we have got all lhat, wBei.ia the indemnity t -The Preaident aaya, afain, thai (bo national inde pendence of Mexico is to be maintained. How to b? maintained alter we own all her territory? How are ?a t>? k. fp up t?>** u?ti<>iiul iu?l> pendence, thf* aeparate ex istence of Mt-xi'o, hft. r wh have taken all h-r territory? An 1 1 at it should be ih< unlit by some that ho w?a talking in a speculative and n< t a practical point, h* w< u!d *?'/ that the President proponed, aa appealed from looking at the map. that we shout.I t?ke almost one-half of the Mexi can territory; that ??? the unsettled half, which was cer tainly worth in re thai the srttl.-d half In the unsettled part we could establish lai d otfi.v*, sell the lands, and in troduce tin American populate n into the country. Bub when we cam* to take the other half, t.he laud already be longed t'? individ'ial?, and we could derive little benefit, from it; for lie believed it wes not proposed to kill th>* Mexc.in population, to drive them out. to confiscate thric Immlm and their property, or to mak- them alavea How, then, could we derive a-.y benefit froiu the d-na-ly settled portion? And if we were already entitled to tha beat hall, how much longer ahou'd we prosecute the war before we should be entitled to the worat hill? The question, hi>n, waa not a speculative, but a pratilical question press ing close upon u?; and vet the President teemed never to have thought of it at all! " Then, sgain, in relation to the mode of prosecuting the war, or of securing pearls, tin message declared that we were to prosecute it mote vigor? us'y, until at last it dropped down in a sort of desponding tone, and told us that the continual success of our arma umy fail to se cure a ?ati-factory peace, and p-rhapa we may wheedle he Mexican people t-? throw ? ff their rulers and adopt our Government Ami then it couc udes that we may foil in th s, and goes back to the oid thing, and recommends it more vigorous prosecution of the war, which it waa ad roi'ted might fa;l to secure the end desired. " In all this the President showed liim-e'.f dissatisfied with the conclusions ho had assumed. He took up one suggestion, mid tried to argue u* into it, but argued him self out of it; he then took up another, and went through the same process, and returned to the firs ; sliowmg him self dissatsfied with aM, and appearing lik>< a man on a hot shovel, fiudiug no place on which he could settle duwu. " Aiiftin, in relation to the termination of the war, the President nowhere, if he bad read the message right, iiili uinted any opinion aa to when this war would come to an end. It did not seeui to have occurred to him to say any thing about that. Now, if be remembered right, General Scott was thrown in'o disfavor, if not into disgrace, by the same Administration for intimating, when the war com menced, that peace could not be conquered in less than f< ur or five months. It was now more than tweuty months before this lac t message was written; it had been prosecuted most vigorous'y; officers and uieu bad done all thtt it waa thought men could d", and buudreds of things never be fore dreamed of; aud the President, who was so impatient at a veteran officer for having expressed the opinion that it would take at least four or five months, came to Con gress W'th a long and elaborate message, in which he did not eveu express an imaginary conception of his own as to when it would terminate ! How is this? Was it not true, aa he said before, that Mr. Po k was lost?that he did not know where he was, that he did not know what to do? He vmis not satisfied with any positiou. He forgot to t->k? up thr> points that arose most obviously out of what he did my. All this went to show that he was most com pletely bewildered, and be (Mr Lincoln) should be most happy to be assured that there whs not aouiethiug abou thia conscience that waa more haraaaiug thau all his mental pel plenties " A CORRECTION. We observe that several of our contemporaries have fallen into a grave misapprehension in regard to the argu ment made by Postmaster General Bi.aik at the Rockville meetii g, held on Saturday last; aud as our own reproduc tion of his *(>eech on that occasion shared the typogiaphi cnl errors from which this misapprehension haa sprung, we think it just, as well t>? our readers as to Mr. Blair, that the proper correction should be made in the report of his remarki*, to the end that the logic of bis argument should not be impaired by the mistakes of the preaa. There are uUo ?>me minor typographical blundera, whioh the intelligence of the careful reader will enable him to detect and correct. It will be remembered that in unveiling the pretext or secret motive for orgiuatir.g what he calls the " abolition programme of converting States into Territories and carrying them back into colonial bondage, to take law fiom Congress," be is reported to have spoken as follows: '? Now, what is the pietext for abandoning this safe and boiling pol cy < f tie President? 8> far it has wtuked well, and at cured the approbation of all well-wishers of the countiy. The abolition programme show* somewhat of the motive 'or converting M'atea into ? ! erritories and carry ing tin ui hick intocolo'.i?l bondag'.to take law fri tu Coo- _ gress without repie'entaiion The reasons assigned are 'slavery (say* the programme) is impossible withiu the exclusive jnrsd cti >n of th? National Government.' lor many yeais 1 h?ve bad this conviction, and have constant ly maintained it I am glad to believe that it i* impoasi ble, if not expretaed in the Chicago platform. Mr. Chase, among other public men, is known to accept it sincerely. Thus slavery in the Territories is unconstitutional; but if the r. bel territory fall* under the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Government, then Mavery will be impossible the e. In a legal and consti utional sense it will die at once The air will be too ptire for a slave. I caunot doubt, but that tb a great triumph has been already won. The moment that the States fell s avery fell also; so that, without any proclamation of tbe President, slavery has ceased to hf-v a legal or constitutional existence in every rebel State." From tbe error of the reporter or of tbe pr.nter, iu giv ? ing rurreucy to tlii* paragraph, it would aeein that Mr. Blair was speaking in his own per?on after the brief cita tion made from the " programme," indicated by the quota tiob marks which embrace the words " slavery is impos sible w ithin the exclusive juri"dietinn of the National Gov ernment," whereas, in point <?t fact, the quotation marks should embrace ?// that fotloics these words im the para graph us ubutc printt.il. The readers of Mr. Suuiuer a elaborate article iu the la*t number of the Atlantic Monthly on " Our I) .meatic Relations" will recogniae all of the above-cited sentences, iu addition to that whose origin ia indicated, to be quoted from Mr. Sum ner's paper. Tbe whole paragraph a* found in that paper i* in tbe following wor It, which were cited by the Post i.acter General merely as giving the assigned ?? c ?i ?iterations of reason and expediency" for adop'ing the policy in question. To this effect Mr. Sumner writes: " At the close of an argument already too long drawn out, 1 ^hall u t slop t? ai ray the considerations ol reas -n itud expediency in behnlt of this jurisdiction ; nor shall I dwell ou th- inevitable influence that it must exercise over mbich m??tivd o( th** lo toy tuiud nothing c.u be clearer, as a proposition -of constitutional law, than that every where within the exclusive juri*dic ti to ot tbe Naii'iml Goiernuiert alavery is impossible. Tho aiKuuient i* as b.ief as it is unanswerable. Slavery i* so (tdioua that, it can exist only by virtue of positive law, plain ai d unequivocal; but no such words can be found in the Const it ut "it. therefore, slavery >s impossible within therxeliiaive jurisdiction of the NatioualGovernment. For many years I have had tl is conviction, and have constantly maintain, d it. I am ?lnd to believe that it is implied, if uot expressed, its theCticago platform Mr. Chase, among our public uien, is known to a-'Cept it sincerely lhus sl. veiy in tl e Territories is unc ustitutional; but if the rebel terri'ory falls under the exclusive jurisdict on of lbs N sti' nal Government, then slavery will be impossible thi-re. In a legal and Constitutional sense it will die at once Tbe air will be too pure for a slave. I cannot doubt that tins great triumph haa been already won. I he mo ment that the State* fell, slavery fell also; so that, even without any proclamation of the President, slavery naa ceased to have a legal aud constitutional existence iu every rebel State.M These won!s were quoted by Mr. Blair for tbe purpose he indicates?that is, as giving the ( rigin and motive ot the policy he dtprerates. As a supporter of "the policy of the President," be does not Lold that the to-celled Seoeded Stales ever " fell," any more than he holda that the Preai dent't " proclamation of freedom" w?i a superfluity, as it must be deemed, if without it and belore it alavery, by the " fill" of the Mates, " bad ceased to have a legal aud con stitutional . xistence in every rebel 8Ute." Itrig. Geu. Sherman, who lost a leg at tbe siege of Port Hu tsoe, haa nearly reeovered. He ia ttill at Newport ! a id is able to hobble about the atn ett by the use o crutchea. I . H it eatimated that ?i* thousand persons baveasc^Jod 1 Mouui WMlun^toB H.) dunn# |0? *1