Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 23, Number 28, Indianapolis, Marion County, 14 December 1863 — Page 2

WEEKLY SEiraffl.

MONDAY, - - -- 1'lta. JIetia(e. The annual message of President Liscoui ls UCore the country. Ia the present crUU of our .national tffurt it will be regarded with .deep interest. Iu expcitionsof tbe state of the country, its suggestions and iu recommeoda lions should. . receive the careful consideration of every citiaeo- , Our institutions rest upoa the theory that man is capable of self government, that onis is a goveminent of the people, hence both ins right and the dutj of the people to carefully scrutinize the acu and l be recommendations of those who rep resent them the servants or the should be bctrsnts of the public will. The last message of the fresident is written in better taste than those which hare preceded it. It . is almost free from the idioms or the peculiar expressions of the President, and the exemption may be due to bis reported physical disabilities. As a contemporary remarks, the varioloid may account for the absence of those quaint illustrations and expressions which hare characterized the communications of the President, and which hare lessened their dignity. There are manyomissions in the message. It doea not discuss those questions of political economy which . deeply affect the prosperity, of the people, indi vidually and collectively. The tarriff question " u not even alluded to, perhaps the President has not had time to study it, aud the currency system has but brief mention. These vital questions which occupied the anxious consideration of his predecessors are subordinate to the single and absorbing idea of negro emanoipation. The emancipation of the negro from his condition of servitude in what are termed the slave States, is regarded by the party in power as the panacea or remedy for all the troubles of the country. So the President states it. So be argues as the representative of the Republican party. If the message foreshadows any idea, it is that every interest of the country most be subordinate to the abrogation of negro slavery. The message of the President is abolition. The poliicv of the Administration U abolition. It ia the purpose of the President od thw party in power to force the country to yield or submit to that policy. Our nation has prospered in a remarkable de . gree, and iu power and greatness have been attained by accommodating itself to its diversified interests and institutions. This policy has been our stretgtb, and if it had been continued, itwould have given ns increased power and greatness. But an effort is being made by the party in power to force a homogeoety to fasten an Iron rule upon a people whose interists the productions of its soil, climate and labor are necessarily diverse, and ean never be otherwise. No government can regulate the laws of climateand production, and the attempt to do so must result n failure. If the nation is ever split into fragments, that will be the error or delusion that will occasion it. The idea of the message, from beginning to end, is to centralize power. That is the object of the proclamation which accompanies the message. It proposes to give the control of a State Government to one tenth of its population upon the single condition thai it is entirely subservient to the policy of the party in power, l'hat is the test of loyalty which the message proclaims and insists upon. Need we say that it is in direct contradiction to the theory of our government? Popular governments and free institutions, such as we hare enjoyed, cannot be maintained, if State rights are stricken down and power is centralized in the Federal government. The history of every empire will attest the fact that the effort to force a homogeneity of policy and institutions, when the interests of the different sections are necessarily antagonistic, has resulted in disintegration. And in the present instance, under similar circumstances, history will only repeat itself. This is the rock which we ehould Avoid. And in conclusion we repeat the warning of one whose sagacity and patriotism none will now question. lie said: "It is well known there have always been those among ua who wish to enlarge the powers of the General Government; and experience would seem to indicate that there is a tendency on the part of this Government to overstep the boundaries marked out for it by the Constitution? Its legitimate authority is abundantly sufficient for all the purposes for which it was created; all its powers being expressly enumerated, there can be bo justification for advising beyond them. Every attempt to exercise power beyondtbese limiu should be promptly and firmly opposed." Interest sue State Kebt. We published a card from His Excellency, Governor Aloarox, yesterday, announcing that k bad made arrangemeoU for the payment of the interest on the State debt due on the 1st of July last, and the interest which will full due on the 1st of January next. The nature of the ar rauhem nt the Governor does not see proper to advice the people of the State. We have no ob jection to Governor Moaro, Messrs. Wijmlow, Laxta & Co., or anybody else paying the indebt edness of the Sute, but the payment of the in terest in the way proposed, under the circumstan ces, is a gratuity. There was no necessity what- . ever for any individual, or number of individuals, assuming this obligation of the Sute. As the Governor says: "the failure to pay the interest on July was not caused by the want of money.' But why the failure? ' At the instigation, and with the advice of the Governor, the Republican members of the House, at iu last session, broke quorum seceded so that the passage of the laws necessary to meet the obligations of the Sute to ber creditors were defeated. This was done with the full knowledge that the action would involve the failure to meet the plighted faith of the Sute. The Democratic members remained in their seaU until the last day that laws could be constitutionally passed by the Legislature, but the Republican members re fused to return and discharges duty which they had solemny sworn to perform. The Governor charges in bis cardthat the Sute officers refused to remit the money to N'ew York, "alleging the absence of a technical appropriation." There U a law upon our sUtue book which expressly for bids the Auditor aoJ Treasurer from drawing any money from the public treasury but in porta - aoce of appropriations made by law. To remove all doubt as the duty of these officers in the payment of the interest on the public debt, ia the absence of express legislative apprupri tions for that purpose, the question was submit ted to the highest judicial tribunal in the Sute for iu determination, and the decision of tbat body was, after a carelol review of the laws bearing upon the subject, that the Sute officers had no legal authority to withdraw the money front the Treasury for that purpose. Certainly no good citizen will deny that this decision of the Court defined the duty and obligations of the Auditor and Treasurer. The - opinion pronounced by the court made the case so clear that it'ha not and . 'cannot be fuccc.full j controverted. Under theae circumstances what was the duty ofs faithful Chief Magistrate, to whom is in trusted the duty of seeing that the laws are faith fully enforced? The ' Constitution had placed the remedy for the difficulty completely ander the control of the Governor. I He is e a. power ed to convene the Legislature Iu extra session wherever. In Lis opinion, the public exigencies - demand it. Us bad ample lime to do so, after the -decision of the Court bad been reudered, which he, at well as every other citizen, is bound to ref pect, to promptly provide for the payment of the

July Interest by legislative appropriations. This I

he refused to de, notwlliistand.ng he had the assurance of a large number of Democratic mem berathat If -the Legislature was assembled in extra session no other business would be attempted - until " the appropriation "-had been 1 made for thi payment of the interest and the other just indebtedness of the Sute. Could more than this be asked from an I Independent legislative body? The stubbornness, we may say mulishness, of the Governor, alone prevented his applying that remedy for the dimculties which had been occasioned by the secession of the Republican members of the Legisla- 1 tnre. He says he has made arrangements to pay the interest, bot those arrangements whatever they may be, are clearly in violation of the laws of the State. The money is in the Treasury to pay the interest, . and tbe . laws of tbe State provide how it shall be taken from the Treasury, and , the officer by whom and tbe way in which it shall be paid. , And what reason does the Governor give for I bis failure, we may say his recreancy in discharging tbe duty thus imposed upon him? He is un- I rilling to trust the represenutives of tbe people. He is unwilling that the Legislature should assemble, for fear . that laws may be passed disusteful to him and his political friends. That is the reason why tbe wheels of legislation were I blocked last winter, and it is likewise bis apology

for assuming or usurping powers forbidden by the he Imposes conditions which unnecessarily diaConstitution and the laws which he has taken an franchises every citizen of the insurgent States, oath to obey and enforce. Has Olives P. who, yielding allegiance to the Federal govern.

Moarox any more interest ' In maiuuiniog the credit and redeeming the plighted faith of Indi ana than any other citizen? He knowa that there was not a Democratic member of the Legislature at its last session, but who was willing, nay anxious, to provide tbe means and make the appropriations to meet every obligation to toe ereditors of Indiana.'' Yet His Excellency claims a higher regard for her interests and honor than all the rest of her citizens. The policy of Gov. MoTO! is dictated and controlled by selfishness. I His only object is to promote bis personal advancement. That is his study. That is the key I note to all his public acts. If he had been a faithful public servant there would have been no failure in the State promptly meetiogall her obligations to her creditors. - Another point. The Journal states that "no agreement, whatever has been made with Messrs. Wixslow, Leher k Co. for the payment of any interest or compensation for the use of tbe money to be advanced by them in paying the interest on our Sute stocks. The whole matter is by them reierreu to toe yooxyau ejin awe ana mere is

no danger of their being allowed to suffer." If the Sutes of Arkansas, Texas. Louisiana, Missno agreement has been made to pay the interest ... Tenne89M. Alabama. Florida. South Car-

upon this advance, they made it with tbe expec Ution that they would receive ample remunera tion, and Governor Mostox is pledged to use his influence to that end. Here is an im' plied agreement to pay interest -upon money to pay the interest upon the State ' debt when there is an abundance of money in the treasury, and intended for that pur pose. The Governor has only to exercise the pre rogatives intrusted to him, and the money can be withdrawn ' from the treasury in pursuance of I law to pay that and all other obligations of the Sute. But His Excellency, while condemning the rebeL for violating the laws of the land and their constitutional obligations, sets the example, or perhaps we may better say follows their example, by trampling the Constitution and the laws under his feet. ' What better is he in that regard than the mean est secessionist in South Carolina? It is just such acts as Governor Morton is committing which brought the present terrible calamities upon the country, and we fear that the selfish snd unhallowed ambition of just such men will destroy tbe best government upon which the sun ever hown. Tbe Proclamation The Objects of the Wart On the 22d dav of Julv. 1861. the Federal House of Representatives, by an almost unanit , , i ., , mous vote, w fo.cmuiy uev.nrru w country ana to the woria the purposes lor wmco the civil war then and now being waged was to be prosecuted. The resolution as it passed that body reads as follows: "Jtemleed by th Hou of Kprimnittive of Ou Uangrtw of l'ndl SVn4, Toat tne pretent aeplorable eWil war has bsen forced anon tha country by the diasntonbrts of tfaa Southern stltsa now revolt a;aint Cthe oiutftational Government, and in anni around tbe capital; that in this national emergency Congress, banwhinc all feelingi f mere pston and resentment, will recollect only iuduty to the whole country; that this war is not waged apou our nan in any aplnt of oppresion. Dor fr any purpore of conquest or subjugation, nor for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established Institution of the Sutes, but to defend rn.int.in th .uPrrm.cy f tho CoiUtitotion and t preterm tho Union with iu dignities equality, and the right of the several States unimpaired, and that as soon a these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease." A resolution of this character could not have passed the House with a large Republican majonty. without iu first having the sanction of the j . ... , . ,l: Administration and the Iediug men of that psr0 ' ty. -The policy set forth in the resolution was accepted by the President, bv the Cabinet snd by the dominant party in Congress as the policy ,1. of the Government, and the country was called upon to lurnutn men ana money "to uetena ana maintain the suDremacv of the Constitution and to preserve the Union with iu dignities, equality and the rights of the several Sutes unim paired " Prompt and liberal was the re sponses 01 - tue people to tne can made noon them to furnish the sinews of war for these declared objects, and if the war bad been waged in the spirit and for tbe purposes expressed in tbe CamisDis resolution ere now the national authority would have been restored over tbe people in revolt against the Constiution-

al Government. Until the last message of the Foa Ma. Colfax Messrs. Alley, Ames, AliiT.ft,;r. it,. 7,.11;.. ...h it. n.r. ;n son, Anderson, Arnold, Ashley, J. D.Baldwin.

' had given no authoritative exprefsiou of the objecu they proposed to accomplish in tneprosecution of the war, or the line of polier tbey intendin. 1 1 ... caw pursue 10.,,.

tnatregani. 1 ne proclamation wnicn .jcompa- Garfield. Oooch, Hotchkiss. A. w. Hubnies the message and the commeuts in the latter ban!, J. II. Hubbard, C. J. Hulbard, I 1 1.. t 1 : ir t'.it- v w vii r.

document upon the former, clearly reveals the - . - schemes and intentions of the party in power. Tbe President in his late manifesto presenU toe acouiee In the policy be advocates or repudiate it. i ne itepuoiican press represent mat tne terms ef amnesty proposed by the President to those in rebellion against the government are exceedingly moderate and fair, and as exhibiting' great kind ness of heart. What sre those terms?' The President offers to all persons who have directly or by implication participated in the existing rebellion, excepting certain classes, a full pardon, with the reHtorstion of all rights snd property except as to Um, ic., upon condition that every person su.ii -u .u..uv .... i -1-11 ,.1.. ...i. LU. k. f. .- ... . ......I I. oo soiemniy swr.r in prawico ot Äimigoiv j-, n i i...wi.u,r.i!. : . . . i i.r.l K. riliutina of tha Tnit.! St.te and th. Union of the Bute thereunder, snU that I will In like Tnanuer abide by aud faltbrully snpport all act or ConvrfM taaed dnrlur the ltia( rvbelltMi with ntarmrm to afl f , lar as not repeaiwi, moaiaeq, or new voia by Coiigfs, or by decision of th SupTfine Court; and that I will, ia liko manner, abide by and f.lthfolly mipprt 11 proclamation, ef tha Pranldent mad daring tho elun rebellloa. bavin rsferanee te a,ir, so Ions and so far a not modified or declared void by decision ot ilia Snnratna f jiarL Ra haln ma lloo. If tbe oath retired nothing but renewed obligation to support the institution ana tne . .. . . Union of the States thereurder, it would have beea fair. But the President aeU up a new test of loyalty. It te not fe.il ty to the Constitution and the Government under it alone, but likewise to all the edicts and proclamations of tbe Presi dent and tbe dominant party in Congress. This ia fact demands of the people of the rebel

States a submission to the very anticipated evils

which they took up arms' to avert. ' Are not these requirements entirely inconsistent with the CaiTTZxuKM resolution and the President's own declarations as to both his povers as Chief Magistrate and .Jits intentions? Is hie first official - communication to the country Mr. Lincoln sUted that he bad no right or had he any intention of 'interfering wrth tbe domestic institution. of the States, or in other words with negro slavery Aud the UimTOM resolution says "tnul war ir not waged for the purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights and established tnatitutions of the States, but to preserve the Union with all iu dignities, equality and the nghu of the several Sute unimpaired, and that as soon ' as these objecto are accomplished the war oughj to cease." But Mr. Lincolh nukes a new test unknown to the Constitution. He is 'unwilling that any of the people or tbe revolted sutes shall return to their allegiance with the rights and esublished iustitutiotis of the States unimpaired. but .he prescribes as; one of the conditions; that" tbey shall "abide by and faithfully support all proclamations of the FresidV - at mad) daring the existing rebellion having reference to slaves." In 1861 the House of Kepresentatives by almost an nnanimous rote, its .' majority representing the President and the partv in power, solemnly declared that the war is not waged to impair tbe rights of the States, yet ment and Hs constitutional authority at the same time upholds and maintains their rights and established institutions. If tho President has no right to interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, as be declared he had not, what right has be to require an acknowledgment of his au thority to do so as a test of loyally? Ifthecongent to an unconstitutional act Is made a test of loyalty in South Carolina tnd Georgia,' the same couditiona may be demanded of tbe citizens of Indiana aud Illinois, which would necessarily disfranchise a large, if not the larger portion of them. . jn lbe proclamation Mr. Lijicols quotes that clauge of the' constitution which nays, "The rjnited Sutea shall cnarantee to every Sute in the Union a republican forra of government." In a republican form of government, nnder iu Constitution, the wilt of tbe majority governs. But it appears from the proclamation that the rebel States cannot return to the Union unless ther abWe DJ and SUpp0rt the edicts of one man And theri Mr Lihcolw further proclaims lht Qne tenlh of h. roien in any of rr . - clina and North Carolina, who bare taken the prescribed oath, can re-esUblish Sute govern ment and shall be recognized as the true State government, and this he calls guaranteeing a republican form of government. One tenth of the population of a State, and they the minions of a dominant party, are to rnle nine-tenths. Is this republican? The proclamation throughout in spirit and purpose is anti-Republican and unconstitutional. It is fanatical and radical. The argument and scheme is specious cunningly devised to decieve the people with an appearance of moderation and fairness. It will require bnt a little penetration to discern the sophistry, hypocricy and injustice of the proclamation. It is not made with, any hope that it will restore the rebel States to their allegiance, but to stimulate the prosecution of the war for the purposes of subjugation, continent and emancipation, which the House of 1 . ..... i Representatives in 1861 solemnly declared were not the objects for which the war was to be waged. Address of Mr. Colfax, tbe Speaker Gtnilmtn ofÜm Iloute of Representative: To-day will be marked in American history as the opening of a Congress destined to face and settle tbe most important questions of the coun- : "d durm whof . '.9teDC ' reba,in; I which has passed its culmination, will, beyond all auestion thanks to our army. and navy and AdI ministration die a deserved deatn. Not only will your constituer.u watch with the strictest scrutiny your deliberations here, but the' friends of libertv, to tbe most dislaut lands, will be interested spectators of your acts. In this greater than Koman forum, 1 invoke you to approach Jhese grave questions with the I . 7" ' "" - M 7 calm thoughtfulness of statesmen, freeing your discussions from that acerbity which mars instead of advances legtsbttiou, and with unshaken reli,v n;-;na nowcr which pave victurv to ftnc on tne divine power wnicn gave Victory to those who formed this U0100, and can give even greater victory to those who are seeking to save t from destruction by the hand of tbe pirricide . t ;wu, .1 mK. ud tr. I invoke you also to remember that sacred truth which all history verifies, that "They who rule not in righteousness shall perish from the earth." ti..i! . i.V. c. I r ,1.:. distinguished mark of vour con6dence and re card, and appealing to you all for that support d forbearance, by the aid of which atone I cnti uuue vo succeeu, 1 am now reauj 10 iao mo uaui . Ä. , , . J. . I of iiftir rwl fan. or nrvtn tlitt rintiM Toil liavtt . 8iLrned me. Mr. Wsshburne.beinsttbe oldest conservative ntmber, was requested by the Clerk u administer the customary oath, and also the oath of al ieeiaDCCi wllich haTin2 beetl pCrformed. tbe 1 Speaker, desiring to preserve the decorum of tne House, said if persons in the galleries should in julgt in manifestations cither of approbation or would be instructed to take such persons into custody. The members were then sworn iu, advancing br delegations as their names were called. The Vote for Speaker of tbe House of KepreeentatlTce. We publish below the vote for Speaker of the I House of Represenutives. Tbe following was I the vote in detail: I 1?.. fftns Udjman R 1 t n .1 lllsiip HlAfsT liitlf Briini1ecer - Kroomalf. W. J. Brown. a. W. Clark, r. Clrk, Clay, Cobb, UoIe,t)resswell, Henrv Wmter Davis. T. T. Davis, Dawes, Demlag, Diion, Donnelly, Drigge, Dumont, j.,. F,rn9worth( F,ntorlf Frank, ?, ; lAeuogg, .luirionn. umtu, uongTcar, uovejny, irm MrnP;,t MrPinrir Mrln.ln S IT. Mil. I ler. Morehead. Morrill, D. Morris, A. Meyers, I Leonard Mvera. Norton 0. O'Neill. Orth, PaI VTi I$9'tXi2' iKrhenok SfhnfieM. Shannon.' Sloan. Smith. smithers, Spauldme. Starr. Stevens, Thayen I Thomas, Tracey. Upson, Van Valkenburgh, E. Jl. Washburne, W. B. Waslibome, Webster, Whale;, William,' Wilder, Wilson, Windom, WoodbnJge. Foa Ma Cox Messrs C.Allen, W.J. Allen, A. C .. Baldwin, Bliss, J. S. Brown, ' Cravens, Dawson, Kden, Edgnrton. Eldridge, English, Fiuk. Harrington, C. M. Harrii, 1 lerne k. Holmao, llutclnns. Wm. Johnson, KalbQelsch, Knapo. Liw, DeBloude, Loue, Marcy, McDow ell, McKioney, Middleton, J. R. Morris, Morri ;DiiTOI,DWMUUlitili:in.nWftiw'Ji"'"' I , W T -.U V.nr. t t n t - k Hees, rt ueeicr, v. a . niw, o. . um I rum. iM. i aj. uw.., I Bailv. CofTfOth. COX. DeillllOD. FblUlp Johnson, Latenr. McAllister. Wm. II. Miller, 3. J. Randall. Stile. Strouse. Foa Ma. MAtuoar Mews.' Brooks, tinder, Hsrdine.B Harris, Klne.J. S. Kollins, Ötuurt, Wadsworlb. Ward snd i eaman. Foa Ma. Kiso Messrs. Chandler, Hall, Mai lorv, Radford, Scott and Fernando Wood, Foa Ma. Stebbik Messrs. Oranson,' OrisW0',JKeTD,n' a mm' UUOil' 1 ru'n J; oieei" ... . i li sini i sinsi". M ij,A..or Miswi-ti-Mcs-rs. Cottman and Field Foa Mi. Rtilm Mr. n. Wood The Clerk, therefor-, declared Mr.-Coifs t Icnlly and duly elected Speaker of tho House - . aW. . S. . t- - . for tne l uirty eigniu vongrexs, Tbe scarlet fever is prcvailiing to some ex I tent among the children of New Albany.

Xlie Difficulties Itefwrw Us II.

In our article of veaterday on the subject we presented m contrast the two plans for prosecu ting and terminating tnis war, between wmcb tne people of this country will have to choose. We there endeavored to lay down the distinction be tween a civil abd a Toreign war known to the law of nations, and then proceeded to state the qucstton'wbether the principles of that law, by which we must be bound If we mean to follow any rule whatever, will not oblige ns to abstain from transcending the limits of the Federal Constitution by tbe acquisition of powers and authorities not embraced ia that instrument. . Ts, then, the proposed scheme of conquering the southern Sutea and treatiog them aa con quered countries capable of being reconciled with rules of the law of nations which govern the con duct or sovereigns in civil warst Or, to pro pound this question in auotber form is a sover eign, in dealing with rebellious provinces or their inhabitants, al liberty to act. without regard to the limitations which his own municipal law affixes to his authority, and to assume and exer else those full belligerent rigbU which accrue to a eonqueror who has seized and deUched a portion of tbe territory of another nation? To this question ,we conceive that there can be but one answer given by any jurist or publicist who undersUnds tbe system which governs the rights of sovereigns and subjects, and who has the sicht est regard for tbe moral laws on which that system is founded. ' " We take it to be an indisputable principle of tue modern law qi nations that a sovereign who has occasion to assume a belligerent attitude to ward a portion ef Ins own dominions, for the re covery of his legitimate authority, is restricted to tbe restoration of that authority as the result of nis exercise of belligerent nghu. If his own sovereignty is one of a limited character, while he may exercise all tbe ordinary rights of a belligerent during the progress of hostilities In order to restore his rightful authority, he cannot at the end of those hostilities legitimately compel the revolted province to submit to an unlimited sovereignty of his dictation. His military con quests diner in this respect from those of a sov ereign who wages war against a foreign country The latter has the right to acquire, as a legal consequer.ee of his victory and possessions, the political allegiance of the inhabitants of the con quered territory, and may impose such govern ment as he pleases, sirmg, however, the rights of private property. Th e former fiehu ' for the recovery of nghu that have been withheld from him; but he cannot superadd to these any rights which he did not before possess. Nations, in other words, do not "conquer their own domin ions, in the full sense aud with all the conse queuces of "conquest, when they have occa sion to repress unlawful or rebellious combi nations against the sovereign power, any more than they "conquer" individuals whom thev punish by force, through the action of their pub lie uriounais, ior violations ot law. They may use belligerent rights while the civil wai is going on, but they do uot merge their sovereign righu or tneir sovereign character in tbe belligerent capacity, but their sovereign character remains just what it was. no more and no less, when the contest is ended and the belligerent capacity no longer required. From the principle which rendered it necessary to terminate a civil war bv an amnesty, wheu the sovereign has prevailed so fur as to compel the insurgents to sue for one, it follows that he can not demand more than a submission o bis lawful authority, as it existed when tbe civil war bezan. He cannot make it a condition of teroin ating hostilities on his own part that his rebellious sub jects shall, as a body or community, forfeit all tbeir political rights and submit to him as a for eign conqueror, for this would be tbe exact opposite of an amnesty. Wheu tiiey are ready to Iny down their arras and to submit to his' lawful authoritr, he is bound to grant an amnesty, with such exceptions as to individuals as he raav see fit to make one of iu conditions. He is bound to grant it, because the amnesty is granted in his own iu teres t because it becomes the ineins of restoring and preserving his authority; and because the limits of that authority are the limiu of what he may rightfully exact. 1 here is also a further pnnciplein reference to tbe termination of a civil war bv an mneaiv. hich is not to be overlooked. An amnesty gig nifies a complete obliv ion ot past offenses, aud 8eu aside all the legi! consequences of rebellion. It may be granted by the successful sovereign. of bis own motion, or it miy be stipulated for by the insurgents, as a condition of tbeir submission. Wbeu the latter is the case, the sovereign is bouud by his agreement; for although there hare beeu instances in former times in which such agreements hare been disregarded by sovereigns, and the principle has been proclaimed and acted upon, that compacU between sovereigns and rebel subjects are void or voidable, it hs been well said by an eminent foreign writer that "in the present day no civilized government would d ire to profess such a principle." In the same way it lollows from the nature of a civil war, uch as that in which we are engaged, that the party clalminz sovereignty over the other partv to the war cannot convert that war into a foreign war, and proceed to mike territo rial cuuquesU as of the territory of a foreign na tion, without admitting Inst other p irty to be, in law as well as iu fact, an independent belligerent power. Mili Ury occupation of portions or of the whole of the insurgent country may be necessary in a civil war; bnt like all the other incidents of tbe belligerent character assumed by the sovereign for the purpose of compelling submission to his authority, this kind of occupation has a special and limited, and a general and unlimited pur pose. It is not territorial couquest, drawing after it all the consequences which attach to the occupation and possession of portion of an ene my s country in a foreign war In order to make those consequences attach to military occupation. t is necessary not only to continue the heiliger euv character, but to lay aside the pretensions and claims of constitutional sovereignty, and to put on the character of a belligerent waging a foreign instead of a civil war; for there is a broad distinction between the belligerent character as sumed by a sovereign against his insurgent rub jects, r.nd tbe belligerent character assumed by a sovereign in a war wiui anoiner sovereign, in the Utter character, as we have seen, territorial conquests can be made; in the former tbey cannot be. Are the people of the United States, then, pre pared to admit that the peoplo of I bo soceded States are foreign nations? If so, we must go back to the act or acts which they claim to have severed them from the Union, and must acknowl edge the validity of those facts, aud must give up our pretensions and claims of consiitutional sov rreignty over the mhabiunu ot those Sutes. We must either adhere to the theory on which we began the war, or we must abandon it. We cannot sit upon two stools, or bait between two opinions. We cannot claim that we are ont of the Union because we nut them out. We must either admit that thev took themselves out of the Union, or mut denv that the fact h id ant valid ity or in soy way change.! their relations to the Federal Government. We roust, theiefore, de liberate! v look in the face all those consequences hieb win attend the adoption of the theory that we are to end this war by tbe conquest and polit ical subjugation of the Southern States; impos ing upon them tbe character of couquered countries, demanding changes in their internal policy as conditions of re admissions into the Union, or keeping tbem out of tbe Union as territorial and suHugated provinces. 1 he first consequence to be considered is. that such an affirmation of the principles of recession by tbe people ot the United States will work the most disastrous resulu iu their future condition it wouia estaousn tno aootrtne not only that a State can secede from the Union, but that, when it has undertaken to do so, it may be conquered as a foreiirn nation. Let such a doctrine be established by a great and important precedent, and we shall have the general government con trolled by sectional combinations that will first apply unfriendiy legislation to drive other Hutes out of the Union, and will then turn round and subjugate those States as foreign countries. This process may sro on, nntil the government of the United Sutes is made to consist of a belt of pow erful States, occupying the central region of the Union, extending from the Hudson river and the Cbesipeske westward to the great lakes and the Rocky Mountains, and all trie outlying States will be subjected to their absolute rule Let ' not the imagination ' comfort ' itself with the idea that all danger of future secession can be prevented by making of the first one the example that Is proposed by the theory referred to. We are all a proud, self relying people, independent In spirits and tint easily ter rifled. The failure of one group of 8 tat ss to ob tain their independence may uot, and in all pro bability will not, deter all others from alike at tempt, when thev think they have received jVist provocation. That such provocations will come, if we create the enormous temptation to give tfcem that ill bo opened by establishing the pre cedent of conquering a seceded State as a for foreign country, no thoughtful American doubt But the alternative of remaining in the Union from the fear of being nubdued and treated as conuuored province would be even worse thin the attempt to withdraw; for the existence of such a fear would operate as a bribe to oppies sion, and the spirit of fair and Impartial legisla

tion would cease to control tbe councils of tbe Ueion. ? ' :

Besides, we may be sure that such an admis sion would hereafter give other nations a fair excuse and an apt occasion Cor interference. Let it once be esublished as tbe result of this, the first of our civil wars, that the secession of a Sute or States makes them in the chancery of our government foreign States, and subjects them to conquest as such, and future secession envoys will not stand avaiting in the ante chambers of Europe, as their predecessors have stood solicit ing admission and recognition in vain. The other nations of the world have an interest in this ere ation of new nations, and in the question of who shall conquer and subjugate them; and this in terest will be asserted whenever we open for it a door of entrance. It is beyond doubt that we are indebted for the non-interference of foreign powers in this civil war mainly to tha fact that we have consUutly professed in our diplomacy to be fighting for the reco ery of our j ust constitutional rights, and for nothing more. - If we imagine that fear of our prowess has been the cause of that neutral attitude, we shall flatter our own vanity at the expense of our discernment. The world at large may have been more or less willing to have the Federal Government recover iu rigbtlul and constitutional supremacy over the people of tbe Southern Sutes. But it will be altogether another question with foreign powers whether whole classes of the Sutes of this Union are to be held by us as dependent fiefs, with no voice in the councils that are to shape our legislation or to rovern our foreieu policv. When we take such an attitude as that, even the ghost of what Mr. Seward has still left to ns of the so called "Monroe Doctrine" will vanish into thin air. If, then, it be tr-t that the public law would oblige ui to abstain from demanding that the Federal sovereignty over those States shall exteud to anything over which it did not extend betöre the war, let ua inquire whether we shall not be bouud by that obligation. Passing by tbe question whether other nations would have a rixht to interfere and considering this as a purely domestic matter, it may be conceded that no ex ternal force will be applied to make us respect the requiremenu of the law of nations in this regard. . But. are those requirements, then ' without other sanctions, "which will jet control our mere willst Clearly they are not; for we. must look forward to a time when our own tribunals will be obliged to pass upon the fundamental questions arising out of any attempt to exercise powers not embraced in tbe Constitution, and supposed to result from terri- . tonal conquest; and we must set upon principles now, that can be carried into effect by an enlight ened and independent judiciary hereafter. We assumo that we shall so act; because we do not believe tbe people of this country are so lost to all sense of right and all perception of the highest public and social expediency, to their own stauding among nations aud to the good opinion of mankiud, as to wiidi to make their judiciary the more subservient registrars of the popular will, or to require of their judges to sanction a particular act merely because it has em.-iuated from the executive or legislative branches of tbeir government. When the public understand this subject, and have freed their minds from tbe confusion produced by false views of what is called "war," they may be expected to act rightly. What then will be the view which the instructed judicial mind must Uke hereafter of the position that the Southern Sutes have been conquered a$ State, and that they are, or were for any period ol time, n the condition of conquered countries? It will be seen that this claim is without any foundation in any sjstetn that belongs to the public law of modern times. Whatever. consequeuce attach, iu individual cases, to the right ful exercise of belligerent rights while the sover eign was obliged to resort to tbe exercise of euch powers, as soon as tbe necessity ceases, the exer cise of thooe powers must cease, and the power of the sovereign to effect the civil rights of men, either individually or collectively, must be meas ured by the municipal law which defines and regulates his powers as a sovereign. There is no other privilege that can be applied to the success ful suppresxiou ot an insurrection, or to the re covery of municipal jurisdiction over a portion of territory that has been wrested for a time from the supremacy of municipal law, unless it be ad united that the government of a nation can con quer a part of iu own dominions, and can affect foreign nations and its owu people with all the consequences of conquest, just as if the territory . were part of another nation. Tbis can never be admitted in the case of a civil war, because such a war is waged for the recovery of a suspended authority, not, as in the case of foreign wars, for the acquisition of an authority that has not pre vious! v existed. The:e principles applv with peculiar force to the political system known as the government of the United States The domestic sovereignty that resides in that government Is very far from being a general and unlimited sovereignty. It consists in a supreme ri;ht to make laws upon certnin subjects, which shall bind the iuhabiunu of euch State. Where there are no obstructions in anv Sute to the executions of the laws of ihe United States witliiu its limits, all the suprenia cy which rightfully belongs to the United Sutes is coronletely enjoyed. Whero any existing obstructions to the operation of the laws of the United Sutes in any Sute have been removed, the United States have recovered all their sovereign rights J here has net er been nnv ustincation tor niarrhing an army into anv Southern Sta'-e, excepting to recover that of which the United States have been deprived by an insurgent force. When the United brutes havo fully re possessed themselves of what they have been forcibly deprived for a time, tbev have recovered all lor which tbey bad any occasion Or right to take up arms; and one ot the obvious means by which thev can finally obtain what they have sought is by an am nesty, when one is sought lor by the insur gents, or when the United Sutea are in a con dition to offer one. We have hus placed before our readors we hope that we have done it clearlv and dispas sionately some f the consequeuces that will matnfestlv flow from the adoption of a theory hich will create another Poland or something even worse on this continent of Worth America. We shall endeavor to tmcc these consequences further in our next issue. TlSew York World Tlie Difficulties Before V. 111. We hare sought in our previous articles under this heid to point out some of the consequences in which the people of this country must involve themselves by uuderuking to suppress the right of local self government, which, by tbe inevitable theory of the Ltiinii, belongs to each of the States, and which we maintain cannot be forfeit ed under any rational application of tho suprem acy that belongs to tbe Constitution and laws of the United States. We have iuvited the attention ot our readers to this subject, because we sre satisfied that the entire theory of conquest, as applied to tne States which are the theatre of an armed insurrection, will result, if adopted, in . -... . emoarraesmeuu anu uuncuiue irom wnicn we cannot extricate ourselves. We believe that we have asigoedome good reasons for this opinion. liut this plan of conquering the Southern States. as If tbey were foreigu nations, and holding them lor a longer or a shorter period as countries con quered from an enemy, has other consequences which demand the most serious attentiou of the American people. W e hare to cousider whether it can be carried out witnout destroying, for our selves as well as for the people of the Southern Sutes, the Constitution for the sake of which we hare fought. We do not now refer to the dangers arising from the institution (f armies of sufficient- magnitude to bring attout such a result, or to the invasions ot personal liberty that we know, Irom tbe experience we have already had, must attend such an enterprise. These ire topic worthy of our gravest reflection; but we allude now to the disrepard and overthrow of those features (f our political svstem without which it cannot exist, and tbe removal of which will be of itself an iimUoUneous revelatiou of the most radical and far reaching character. One of the most important and essential features of the Union consiau in the fact that the people of each State, In respect to all matters of government not committed by tbe federal Constitution to the jurisdiction of Congress, are a sovereign people. Each State using, tbe term ss standing for the people of tbe Sute in their collected political capacity is a sovereign power. v e may bare our Individual opinions on the ex pediency or inexpediency of this condition of things; we may value more or may value less what are called Staler Ights; we may differ about their extent; or we maj think that tbe national sovereignty is endangered by tbe State sovereignties, or may entertain the opposite opinion. 1141 no sane tnm win unaeruae to deny that, as a matter of right, and as a matter offset, the people of bis own Sute, and of any other, exist aa a Dooy poiuio rosseasea 01 a political sover eignty, whether ho holds thtt the Constitution of the United State ia a compact between such separate sovereignties, or whether he rtamrds it as a national government formed by the grant of certain political rowers proceeding from the peo ple inhabiting each of the States. Whatever we may think on these tublecu, it is plain that our political system, In respect to the principle of wtrue sovereignty, can never be changed without

a revolution that, will shatter society to its very

foundations. ; ; ; i ' It may please certain theorists to propound the idea that tbe sovereign! jot a Sute, be it more or less, can be forieited for the rebellion of a: majority of its Inhabitant tguilAt the auiborityjrf tbe United Sutes. But the question SnsUntly arises, to whom is it to be forfeited? The idea of a for feiture, whether of a thing or a franchise, whether of a right ot property or of a right of distinct po litical existence, implies a superior capable by paramount right of receiving and holding what is forfeited. V ho is this superior in relation to tbe States of the U nion? Is it the Federal govern ment, or, in other words,! It the people of the remaining states iu tneir collective or national capacity 7 . It will not belp na to an answer to this ques tion to refer to the rightful supremacy of the Con -stitulion and laws of the, United Sutes. Tie Constitution aud laws of the United States do not bind the States, but they do biud the individual inbnbiUnti ol tbe bu'.e?, as tne . supreme law . that is to govern their individual conduct. It was thought at tbe time of the esubli.bmeut of the Constitution and has been believed ever since that this distinction was of great moment; and accordingly the whole op eration cf tbe supremncv of tbe national vJonsU tutiou and laws hasleen secured and worked out bv applying individual forfeitures and punish menu to every form of rebellion, resisUnce or tresson agaiust the Federal authority. Now, if we are to go back and reverse all this, if we sre to treat the Federal supremacy as applicable to States in their corporate capacity; and by that application set up a paramount right capable of receiving and holding or supprescing tbe State as a thing forieited. we must unread the Constitution aud overturn its characteristic principle. - If we look into-tbe. Constitution the only bond or instrument that makes us in auy respect a nation, or creates national rights while we find that individuals may be judicially punished by forfeiture for tbe crime of treason, we do net find that a Sute can commit that crir.ie or that Congress can punUh it except as a personal crime, we nnd, moreover, that tne uoosmu isteuce is not derived by any grant from the peo pie of the United Sutes, and is therefore not ca pable of being resumed or extinguished by tbem by reason of any paramount rij:hl as grantor or creator. It follows therefore that the political existence known as a Sute can be extinguished by the people of the United Sutes only by an act of mere lorce; and so the theory of conquering and holding the Southern Sutes as conquered Sutes will be obliged to proceed. In other words, it must step out of the Constitution, and, giving op the amennbhty of individuals to the laws ot the United State-, it must undertake to extin guish the govern meut and political being of State, just as a conqueror extinguishes by force the covernment and political bein; or a foreign territory which be bas wrested Irom bis enemy can this be done without a toul overthrow of .tbe Constitutiou? To ask the question is to answer it But let us follow the sut jeet limber. In the first place let us suppose that duiiug a war with a foreign nation we hve made a conquest of a portion of the enemv a territory The government of the United Sutes has the power of making vrar; but this power was not conferred for the purpose of acquiring foreign territory. It was given in order that tbe rights of the country or its citizens might be vindicated. when necessary, by arms. As one of tue inci dents of this power, military possession may be taken of a portion of an enemy s country, which amounts to conquest. Uut the country so con quered does not become the property of the United Sute until a treatv has made it so; and it has always been held by all our statesmen and parties that when a perfect title is thus obtained by treaty, at the conclusion of a foreign war, tbe country so acquired caunot be held indefinitely asa conquered dependencv. It must be treated as part of the property of the United Sutes, out of which new Sutes are to he formed and admit ted into tbeUuion; for tbe United Sutes has no machinery and no powers by which it can indefi nately hold and manage dependent and subjuga ted provinces. Here, then is one limitation upon the Federal power of conquest, even when applied to tbe dominions of foreign nations; for hen we acquire foreign territory by conquest and treaty ,.we must hold it according to our owu institutions aud fundamental laws. Again, we do nut, perhaps, need to remind our readers that tbe power to govern what in our system are tecbuicaliy called " territories, nas . . . . . . ... . . . ... been the subiect of fierce disputes which have convulsed the coutitrv, and that even the peopl of the North are agreed upon iu extent and na ture, although it is universally admitted, as it necessarily must be, that this power is applicable only to acquisitions which have come to the Unit ed Sutes bv tbercession of foreign nations or Indian tribes. But now let us figure to ourselves that eleven Sutes, by every just theory of this Union, ex cepting that of secession, still within iu pal four of them original parties to me esuousnmen of the Constitution are seized as loreign con uuesU. and their immediate and unconditional ritrht to narticiDate iu tne corernmeiit 01 tne Union is denied. To what part of the Constitu --J B 1 a. tion shall we resort for means of holding and governing them? We must resort to some part of that instrument, for it is among our settled public maxims that the government of the United Sutes is not a general sovereigii,.capaoie or noia inc and managing dependent and conquered countries as other sovereigns can aud do whose rights, authority and capacities are or a dinerent nature. We must go to the Constitution ol our country to find its power todo anjl.ung what ever. Shall we then resorfr to the war power for the means of eoveniinjr the Southern Sutes hen we have conquered them? We shall find that this power embraces uo conquests but those obuined in foreigu wars, and that even these do .1 - ft- . 1 T . I O. . not become tne property oi tne unueu aiaies until the possession is confirmed by treaty. And if we are to resort to the war power, the war must become chronic and perpetual; for if we are to govern from that source ot power tne source must beforever open, and all tbe doc trineswhich have been asserted as necessary attendants and cotditions of a sUie of war, aud which now press so heavily upon us, must be in perpetual activity. Or. ball we report to the territorial clause of the Constitution, and endeavor to make it applicable to Sutes whose sovereignties we have suppressed? We shall find that tbe power which it confers extends only to property which the United States has acouired from a Voreizn nation, and that Virginia or Georgia cannot be so acquired until we have first made the people of those States foreign nations, snd then compel them to cede their country to the United Suites. Further, the Idea of conquest and subsequent readmission into the Union implies the right and power to divide or consolidate those Sutes; for the power of a conqueror over the inert political Statut of a conouered territory is unlimited. But what is the theory of the Union in respect to rep resents tion in the Senate? By that thoory each Bute is called to be represented by two Senators, and it holds this ns an absolute right, to which no conditions are or can be attached. The theory of conquest assumes that this right has been for retted by a rebellion, or that it is extmgnisnea ny the intervention of a civil war. The precedeot. then, will s and thus: That when the people of crrUin States of contiguous situation and similar inleresU have, in a period of passion and excite ment. undertaken to leive the Union, and it has been necessary to repress by military power the combinations they have formed for the purpose, and they then find themselves again in practical . ... .1 r l . I. connection wun tne reacnu government, tucir several riehu of representation in the oenate. as fixed bv tbe Constitution are gone, and they must take such representation ns the pleasure of the remaining Sutes may accord to tbem liut if tbe Southern Slates are out or tbe Union, snd are to undergo a process of re-admision, what nre we to do with the third section of article four of the Constitution? "New SUtes may be admitted bv tho Congress into tbe Union; but no new Sute shall be formed or erected within tbe jurisdiction of any other Sute. nor anv other State be formed by the lunc tion of two or more States or parts of Sutes, without the consent oi the Legislatures of the Sutes concerned, as well as of the Congress. We must either adhere to this provision ot tbe Constitution, or we must disregard it. it was placed in the Constitutiou io order to act as ose of tbe means-of perpetuating the identity and indissoluble political cx is twice oi eucn or tue 1 Sutes. If the theory of conquest and re-ad-mlmion is not to be resorted to lor tbe purpose of evsding this provicion, it u not wanted. If it is to be used as the means of forcing partition or consolidation, the great purpose of the Const tu tion will be frustrated, snd theroaner a numerical majority of the people of the United Sutea will make snd unmake what SUtes they please. Let tho people of New England look well to the pre1 cedent which tbey rosy patronize or assist In making on this momentous ocention. When that popular mnjortiy nas suppresses tne line oi state for the cause of rebellion, other occasions will be easily made and other causes found fur a repetition of tho process. Hostility to slavery will continue forever to be the bond of unity between the East and the West, or the centre. In all that we have said in this discussion we

, r ,,." . 7 "fTT ferson Davis' Government could be counted by lineal existence of each fetate is au indes ructible Hlvj .cbieved ODce h . 7 existence.. The franchise involved iu that ex- c... v- v

! . I. .i,D.,ju lk.1 Ihn r . na t a 1

have been careful to keep in view the doctrine that has been proclaimed and acted upon by tbe

Supreme Court of tbe United Sutes, in respect to the character and condition of the iuhabiunU of the Confederate Sutes while the civil war is going on. It has been adjudicated, for example. that the property of a citizen of one of those b tales is liable to capture on the ocean as property of an enemy while hostilities are actually prosecuted, for the reason that there is a wft between the -two parties, who must be tree ted as opposit belligerenu until the sovereign bas pre vailed or been defeated by the insurgents. Eat it is a gret error to suppose that this decision afforda any warrant to the idea that -the victory of the sovereign or er the insurgents will enuil the consequences of territoral conquest upon the country which those insurgenU have occupied and controlled. When the armies of tbe Confede rates are beaten and dispersed, the United Sutes will cease to sund in tbe character or a belligerent , and will occupy only the relation of a sovereign, as that relation is fixed bj the Constitution. New York World. - TTwrk for therutnre. We must not permit our enemies to misrepre sent our real issues. We must not let them impress on the public mind, by dint of often repetition, false ideas in regard to what they call the We do not ask, or recognize as possible, con stitutionally, what tbe PuriUn abolitionisU aim at. Thev aim. in the North, at the same thin that Jefferson Davis partr. at the South, are workingfor. , Jefferson Davis and his partisans do not want tbe war to stop soon, even by the recognition of tbeir Confederacy. We know, from men devoted to the Southern cause, active in their battle-fields and influential among the Southern pt-ople, that, were tbe Northern war on tbem to be stopped were the Democratic principle to be anckowledged by tbe North that the war ought not to be maue on sutes were the southern people to feel sure that no more war was to be wared on tbeir institutions, in tbe n.meof tbe Federal power of the United Slates the domination of Jefobject of tbeir forming the Southern Confedera cy, each Sute would cheerfully resume tha tern porary powers delegated to Mr. Davis Confederacy. Sutes' righu is tha political genius of the people of the Southern Sutes. Jefferson Davis knows it so well that he desires to protract the contest till the Southern States will have become, as he hopes, accustomed by usage to a centralixed rule. Hence be fosters and endorses Generals like Bragg and Fem ber ton. while geniuses like Beauregard snd Price are thrown into bye plays. The iucomparable Jackson he kept, till the day vf his death, in a subordinate position ; and .bee. whom be trammels, he would still keep, as he once tried to do, as a partisan fighter, with men armed wiib squirrel vines, ou impracticable mounUins, except that Virginia would not submil io Fucn caprice. W e fully believe now. what we have lone sus pected, that it is Jefferson Davis's policy to pro tract tne war, despite ol indescribable sunerinrs of the Southern people, in order to consolidate bis new rule to cement it in Southern blood. The PuriUn abolition same, as revealed br Seward in his cups aud hiccoughs at Auburn, is substantially parallel. The' Puritan game is to protract the war till the period of another Presidential election is passed, which is to be decided not by the people, but by tbe army. Then to recognize the Southern Confederacy, on whatever terms, and to employ the army, now become a veteran machine, in the snhjajation and enslavement of the people of the North. iNorth and South, this is the one inevitable re sult of protracting the war. 1 he sole Democratic plan would defeat tbe conspirators in both sections Ston the war at oncel How? By recoeuizine the Confederacy? The Federal Government have no power to do this. The Federal Generals have no such power except by a revolutionary act. Tbis is what Davis s organs ssk. They want Lincoln to re cognize the Davis Confederacy, when the time comes. We wsnt tbe miliUry power, on both sides, to agree to stp fighting. To af ree to respect, in the meantime, the respective buntings, called flags, till the people of each sovereign State shall have, by tbeir decision, agreed to some compro mise, or else pronounced for a renewal of war for reasons that rational men can understand. Let us not permit our unreasonable but malicious enemies to misrepresent true DemocraU. It is not war that we oppose, but sn unreasona ble, an illocical, an unconstitutional, an unAmerican war. The Federal Constitution refused to the Federal Government suy power to coerce, or to make war on Sutes. Let ns look the fact in the face, that except as an intruder and a usurper, tbe Federal Government bas lapsed, and that tbe dissolution of the Union has been followed, as all great statesmen saw it must be followed, by a war between tbe Sutes. In this war Southern States combined and called . themselves Confederate Sutes. Northern Sutes, holding, by virtue of a flagitious sectional election, the machinery of the late Union, cling to the name of United States. It is an old name, but a new thing. It means the States that units on New England ideas. Iu true name would be "the PuriUn Commonwealth." Now, it ia of prime importance to hare the miudsof the people of the different Sutes enlightened on tbe true issues. By and bye, if we, if our friends, do not bestir themselves in the propagation of the truth, it will be too late. Tbe "Puriun Commonwealth," when fully established, will permit no views to be published not emanating from themselves. We have been befogged, and betrayed, by trusting to professed, not real friends. 'The men with whom Governor Seymour is now acting are part and parcel of the threatened "Puritan Commonwealth." They quarrel bitterly with tbeir Puritan brethren. Puritans always do But tbey sre "War Democrats" a thoroughly so as John A. Dix, John Cochran, John Van Buren, and tbe rest of the free soil Johns that lift their ejvs to tbe orient of New Engländern. The quarrel between them is not about the butchery, but about who shall have the hides and tallow ol the Federal butcher 6hop. In this the people can have no interest. Let the butchers settle their disputes amung tbem3lves. ' In this, Democratic priuciples have no interest, and true DemociaU can only mourn that they hate been betrayed. Dark days are before us. But, jet, eouraget Human society is the work of God, and He protecU His own. On this soil the principles of American Democracy, aud they only, can succeed. Once nore, we cry, Enroll, or y unite, iducmte! No man, now, is to be trusted as a Democrat, till you have taken him apart, read to him the simple political catechi.-tu of Democracy, be sure that he unuersUnds it. and then require from him the avowal and promise that be ill be faithful to it, and mainUin it. When he has done tbis, enroll his name. As names multiply thin, organize your men by tens, in hundreds. ' Then call these hundreds olten together, in tbeir hundreds and instruct them, and fortify them, iu Democratic princples There is an association engaged ia doing this. It is widely spread. - It operates quietly anddeterminedly, in many of these Northern States. It invites, now, tbe co operation of all like-minded. "In union is strength," snd it will be well fer all Democratic organizations throughout tbe country, who appreciate the thoroughness of tbe work to be I done, and have the earnestness to engage in it, to act on a common plan. Tbis will be at the same time a safeguard nainut excesses and nnlawlul acu, provoked by opirrcssion, but foolish, because a. i J i, . t 'fXT V f . i pronuess to any puuuc goou. i.riwBtui journal. Tita Southern Account sf She Iatt Batttlee. The Southern account of tbe recent battles near Chattanooga discloses a singular fact. A portion of the Confederate army, it is conceded, wss not snimated with that spirit fgallantry which hat hitherto characterized it. While tbe right wing, under Gen. Hardee, made a stout and successful fight, the left, u ne'er Gefl. Breckinridge, gave way after a feeble resisUnce and retreated in disorder end confusion. It is asserted in :be report to which we refer that this was no fault of Ueu. Bragg or bit subordinate officers, but merely because of tbe disinclination of the men to fight. This Is perhaps the solution: Gen. Breckenridge's command itjeomposed principally of Kentuck ians and Teunesseans, who, it Is said, cordially detest General Bragg, and have detested him since Lis Kentucky campaign of last year. This feeling was doubtless sggrarated by the Murfreeitboro affair, where, in obedience to an order of the Commanding General, Geo. Brackenridge led bis division into the very jaws of flettth-losirg 1,750 men out of 6,700 To this may be added the entire want of confidence of Gen. Breckenridge In the ability of Gen Bragg as a field officer, which distrust wss likewise entertained bv the officers and men of hla command. It seems, then, that they had simply determined to fight no longer under the banners of General Bragg, and, all Other means failing, adopted this mode to relieve themselves of bis presence. It is a curious phase in the war. New York News. . .

I -.".". wuivu was u Hlia