Loss of National Existence to be More Deplored than War (Dec. 1861)

Source: The Friend. Honolulu: December 2, 1861. Page 94

Nevertheless, leaving the responsibility of the beginning and continuance of this conflict to those on whom it must rest, I feel equally bound to say, that beyond all the evils of the present war, with all its calamities, losses, sufferings and sins, would be the loss of national existence, the permanent severance to the American Union. A nation may well suffer in the maintenance of the principles on which it was founded. Individual suffering and loss, social and commercial embarrassment or bankruptcy, the prostration of credit, the impoverishment of cities, the loss of life; bad as they are, are yet not to be considered in comparison with the great and enduring evils of national ruin. Whether the present war continues one year or ten, it is not so bad as the continued series of wars and internal strifes that would certainly succeed the disruption of the Union. There would be witnessed here the same tragedies which kept the German States so many generations in almost unending conflict, the effects of which have not yet passed away. Nay, our case would be far worse than theirs, for servile war would be added to all other evils. The question now before us is not to determine upon war or peace. This has already been determined, with or without our intervention, and beyond all present control. It is manifest, regret it as we may, that the war, the trial of strength, if you please to call it so, must go on until one of two things happens — either, the "Seceding States," having sufficiently proved the folly of rebellion and the strength of the Government will return to the Union, not as subjugated, but as equal States, as they were before, or, both parties becoming weary of the contest, a treaty of peace, with some sort of re-adjustment of interests, will be declared. In the former case, a new era of happiness and national glory will begin. In the latter, a temporary truce with renewals of war and divisions—a condition of things little better than anarchy, for an indefinite period, is the best to be expected. But to attain either result, the. active prosecution of the present war for a time, how long no one can say, is now understood to be an unavoidable condition. The only thing left for individuals to do is to choose on which side they will stand. We speak with sadness, and the stem-reality of passing events Is yet more sad. For weeks, for months, perhaps for years, this fearful civil war is destined to go on. But if it results at last, as God grant it may, in the full re-establishment of the United States government in its integrity and pristine vigor, the sacrifice will have been well endured, the suffering will not have been in vain.
— Loyalty and Religion — By Rev. W. C. Eliot, St. Louis.

Southern Rebellion (Dec. 1861)

Source: The Friend. Honolulu: December 2, 1861. Page 92-93.

Some unknown person has laid upon our table the Eighth Annual Report of the "Young Men's Christian Association of San Francisco." We have read the document with much interest, and rejoice to learn that an association of this description has been in active existence in that city for eight years past. This Report is accompanied by an interesting Anniversary address by the Rev. W. C. Anderson, D. D., of that city. The address contains the following paragraphs, upon the present war in the United States: 

War exists. Our peace-loving, happy, prosperous country has dropped the plowshare and has seized the sword. Her commerce is languishing in her harbors; the sound of the loom and the nnvil waxes fainter ; the note of the herdsman scarce is audible; and in their room we have the "confused noise of the battle of the warrior," and see the garments of our sons and brothers rolled in blood. Let us look at some of its characteristics. 

1. It is upon a stupendous scale. Among the annals of rebellion and civil wars, history records nothing like it. The civil strifes of Greece, and Rome, and our father-land, England, were mere local insurrections when compared with this. It covers an area far larger than that of the Roman Empire in the days of its glory—extending from Maine to the Rio Grande, from the Bay of the Delaware to that of San Francisco. It involves directly thirty millions of people; a people for the most part inured to toil, and, when disciplined, destined to be terrible in battle. From the vast extent of territory, and the warlike character of the combatants, it is likely to be the bloodiest war of modern times; already have we fearful earnest of this fact. 

2. It is an unprovoked war. It comes in the form of naked rebellion against just authority, and against mild authority; authority which fostered and protected the personal and material interests of all subjects. Since the world began, never has there existed a government more mild, more equitable. Errors in its administration have been numerous and gross, but they have never come in the form of oppressions of the citizens. Oppression of any citizen or class of citizens was from its origin unknown. So far as the freedom and the rights of the subject are concerned, if ever a civil government was entitled to the name of paternal, it is ours. A too great disposition to yield its own rights to the unreasonable demands of its citizens has been its greatest weakness. And to that very party, which is now in rebellion, it has been singularly kind, —humiliatingly so. Its legislative, judicial and executive departments have, for the last thirty years, yielded to the unconstitutional demands of these men. With a coolness unparalleled they have steadily held up in terrorem "disunion;" and to pacify and retain them, the Government has broken its compromises, modified its protective policy, destroyed the only comprehensive and adequate system of finance it ever had, and degraded itself in its own eyes and the eyes of the world. They demanded the purchase of the Floridas as an outlet for their peculiar institution, and it was purchased at the expense of millions of dollars. For the same reason they demanded the annexation of Texas, and it was done at the cost of many millions more. They demanded that the Ordinance of 1787 should be set aside, and that the soil which it had solemnly consecrated to freedom forever should be occupied by Missouri as a slave State, and it was done. As some atonement for this almost sacrilege, a new line was drawn between free and slave territory, known as the "Missouri Compromise" line; a few years only had passed before they demanded that this compromise should be annulled, and it was done. In a word, the South had but to ask, and the boon, however unreasonable, was granted. It was only when it demanded the concession of the fundamental principle upon which the nation exists, —namely, that the majority must rule, —that it said no! And even then it was a reluctant no; for days and weeks it meekly suffered the despoiling of its goods, the invasion of its territory, and treated its rebellious subjects with the forbearance which an over-fond father extends to a spoiled child; and it was only when its flag was trampled under foot, its commissioned servants driven from their posts of duty by shot and shell, and a determination avowed to take the National Capital, that it resisted. I repeat, never was there a Government so kind, so conciliatory, so forbearing, as has been that of the United States to all citizens, and especially to those who have rebelled against it; and I again declare that by no act of its own has it given cause, or even plausible occasion, for this rebellion. 

3. The end proposed to be accomplished by this war is sui generis, literally so; an end such as was never before proposed by any people whatsoever rising up in arms. The civil wars of our fatherland had for their avowed end the liberty of the people; such was the war of the Commonwealth in Cromwell's day; such was the almost bloodless revolution of 1668; liberty was the object of our own revolution; such was the proposed end of all the French revolutions. The people of Continental Europe arose in 1848 to obtain freedom; so did the brave Hungarians in 1849. The recent successful uprising in Italy was to obtain deliverance from despots, and a distinct nationality. There is something holy in wars like these. Even the groans of the dying are softened and hallowed, yea, the memories of the dead are sainted by the glorious godlike cause. But what is the object of this war of 1861? This war in the heart of free, liberty-loving, Christian America? What is its avowed end and object? It is to destroy that constitutional liberty which Washington and the fathers have bequeathed to us. It is to blot from the page of world history the heart-cherished truth "that all men are created equal, and have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." It is a war based on the abominable assumption that the great theory of self-government is a failure; and hence the purpose to found on the ruins of our glorious republic an empire whose "corner stone," to use their own words, is "human slavery." It is a war against free labor and in behalf of slave labor. In a word, it is a war whose end and aim is to forge beyond the power of breaking, and to rivet forever, the chains of human bondage. Whether, then, we regard it in its origin, its progress, or its aims, we are forced to pronounce it an unprovoked, unkind, ungodly war. 

But this unholy war is now fairly inaugurated, and has received a baptism in the blood of hundreds of the noblest patriots of the land. Its termination by compromise is impossible. The South desires no compromise; never proposed to receive any. It claims the absolute, unconditional concession of all its demands; and they are enormous. The Government must surrender all harbors; all the forts; yea, all the territory south of Mason and Dixon's line; it must recognize the Confederate States as an independent nation; it must permit a monarchy, or an iron military oligarchy, to be planted on that soil of freedom which was bought by the blood of the Revolution. On the part of the United States it is a war for existence; nothing more; nothing less. Make peace on the ultimatum of the South and the great Republic ceases to have an existence. Under these circumstances the cry of "noncoercion," "peace," is simply the traitor's cry. It is the weapon he uses to defend his friends in places where he cannot use the sword. Such is the present condition of our national affairs. The crisis which is upon us is a fearful one, and may not be shunned even if we desire to do it. As lovers of freedom and of our country, the only course left to us is to adjust ourselves to this new and sad condition of things.

Who is Jeff. Davis President of the Southern Confederacy (1861)

Source: The Friend: Honolulu, December 2, 1861. Page 94.

Jefferson Davis was born in Kentucky in ISOS, and in infancy was removed with his family to Mississippi. He received a military education at West Point, where he was graduated in 1828, and was appointed brevet second lieutenant. 

During the seven years that he remained in the army, he served with credit in several Indian wars, but resigned his commissipn in 1835 and turned cotton planter. 

His first appearance in politics was in the Polk presidential campaign. The next year he was elected to Congress, but he resigned in 1846 to command a regiment in the Mexican War, where he served with distinction. 

After his return he was elected to the Senate, and, in the stormy debates which preceded the compromise of 1850, he distinguished himself as the most uncompromising champion of extreme southern claims. He was a forcible debater of a highly intellectual cast of mind, with a subtle pride which perverted his whole moral nature. He was President Pierce's Secretary of War, and, despite the superior abilities of Marcy, was the leading spirit of that cabinet. His unscrupulous and domineering nature gave him complete ascendancy over a mediocre man like Pierce and a man of supple principles like Cushing; and Marcy, though he did not approve, was powerless to resist the bold pro-slavery machinations in that really able cabinet. 

It was then that Jeff. Davis sowed the dragon's teeth from which hosts of armed men nave sprung up. The Kansas imbroglio, which was fomented by that cabinet, was the entering wedge which has cleft the Union. Douglas's repeal of the Missouri Compromise would have worked little practical mischief, had it not been for Jeff. Davis's successful plot in the cabinet to abet the attempts to thrust slavery into Kansas in spite of the will of its inhabitants.— The World.

The Immense Armies of the Potomac (Dec. 1861)

Source: The Friend. Honolulu: December 2, 1861.

There is little doubt, remarks the Cincinnati Enquirer, that the armies now in Washington and its vicinity amount to the immense aggregate of near 200,000 men on each side, or 400,000 combatants. Whenever a general battle shall occur, it will not only have no parallel on the Western Continent in the forces engaged, but hardly one in the history even of modern Europe will vie with it. The great battles of Napoleon were generally fought with, numbers far inferior to those now under the walls of Washburn. 

For instance, at Austerlitz, where Napoleon defeated the combined armies of Russia and Austria, he had but 80,000 troops; the allies had 100,000. At Jena and Auerstadt, where he broke the power of Prussia, his forces were not over 130,000 strong. At the great battle of Wagram, fought with the Austrians on the bank of the Danube, in 1809, he had but 150,000 men. At Borodino, under the walls of Moscow, he had but 120,000 to oppose the Russians. At Waterloo he did not have to exceed 80,000 troops. Not one of the battles in Italy or Spain even equaled this last number. The only battle field we now recollect, where the combatants were as numerous as those around Washington, was Leipsic, in 1813, where Napoleon had 176,--000 men, and the allies—Russians, Austrians, Prussians, Swedes and Germans— numbered 200,000. Nearly half a million men took part in this tremendous battle, which was known as the Combat of the Giants. It lasted three days, and ended in the complete overthrow of Napoleon, who was driven into France, where a series of disasters commenced, that did not end until Napoleon abdicated his crown and was exiled to the Island of Elba, in 1814. 

No battle was ever fought on the soil of the United States where 60,000 combatants took part in it on both sides. From these figures we can judge of what a battle we have reason to expect when the hosts of McClellan and Beauregard, more than twice the number of those of Napoleon and Wellington at Waterloo, come in collision on the banks of the Potomoc. It will be an event that will be the great military feature, probably, for ages to come, of martial prowess in America. Washington never had 30,000 men in one army under his command; Jackson never had 15,000, and Scott never before the present year had seen 20,000 men under his orders. Great is the ability required to manoeuvre and handle such a large body of men, and bring them all into action at the proper time and place. The late battle at Bull Run extended over seven miles from one end of our line to another. 

At Washington, probably, the battle may be raging over a field double this size. To know what is going on in such an amphitheatre, and to be prepared to order up reserves and strengthen every exposed point, requires the highest degree of intellect. At the battle of Bull Run half of both armies never fired a shot Beauregard had 40,000 men at Manassas Junction, only three miles distant, whom he never used, and yet he would have been defeated had it not been for the opportune and unexpected arrival of a portion of Gen. Johnston's army from the Upper Potomac. McDowell had a powerful reserve, that took no part whatever in the action, and yet it was strong enough to have beaten back Johnston's division if it had been on hand at the proper moment. We have confidence that McClellan has not only plenty of men, but believe he knows how to use them.