Polynesian: "To be impartial" (1862)

Source: The Polynesian, Honolulu. September 20, 1862. 

"To be impartial," say the Advertiser, in dilating upon the state of military affairs in Virginia. What a naive confession of former one-sidedness, braggadocio and bigotry; what an unusual emotion in the Advertiser's sensorium! "To be impartial"- not once, when no purpose can be subserved and longer by unfairness and partiality; but to be impartial, candid and fair in recording events, as well as advancing conclusions, is what the Advertiser has yet to learn. We hail its commencement, however, with pleasure. It does well to acknowledge that the rebellion is something more than a flea-bite, and will require something more than cold steel to suppress it. 

In one thing, however, we see that our contemporary still follows its old habit of jumping at conclusions. It predicts that the general emancipation of the slaves, by proclamation of the President of the United States, is an event close at hand, and that it will prove an invincible weapon in subduing the rebellion. We fear the Advertiser's prophesy will meet with considerable interruption in its fulfillment, from the rebellious slaveholders, who are so "terribly in earnest," and whose strength has hitherto been so singularly underrated. We have been led to believe-though we may be wrong-that the President's proclamation were not kindly received at the South, and generally speaking, a dead letter, unless presented at the point of the bayonet. But it is the sharpness of that very point which the impending battle in Virginia will probably decide. It therefore seems to us a little premature to build much faith on emancipation proclamations until the authority of the Federal Government has been restored at the South. General Hunter tried emancipation proclamations in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida, and the foolish slaves would not avail themselves of the opportunity as long as their masters had arms in their hands to prevent them. The old proverb says: "first catch your fish, then stew it." When the Federal Government has re-established itself throughout the length and breadth of Dixie land, it can dispose of Dixie's secants as it pleases.

The Advertiser quoits the whole of the circular letter of Doctor Doupanloup, Catholic Bishop at Orleans, in France, formerly editor of Ami de la Religion, in Paris. As Mr. Doupanloup is well known, we believe, as a sensation preacher, and we have not the space to quote the various strictures which his letter has received from his own co-religionists, we refer the Advertiser to the "New York Freeman's Journal and Catholic Register" of June 7, 1862, as one of the several reviews which that letter has called out, and which- "to be impartial"- it might not be amiss to know. 

"To be impartial," when speaking of the abolition sentiment in the Northern States, why not intimate that journals of so widely circulated as the New York Herald speak of the abolition "pressure" upon the Federal Government in this wise:

"As the reason for this indecisive policy of the administration, the President says that the abolition faction comprises 'many whose support the country cannot afford to lose.' There never was a sadder mistake than this. The country can afford to lose the support of every man who prefers the negro to the Union. The abolitionists are so small, though so noisy a a faction, that the country would not miss them if every one of the were hung. Their only services to the country consist in the 'pressure upon him,' of which the President speaks. The abolition party does not number one-tenth of the people of the loyal States. The abolitionists in the army and the navy are so few and far between that they are never heard of. Even in the Massachusetts regiments the conservatives largely predominate. The 'support' of the abolitionists is a delusion. They talk much, they write much, they fill offices, but they do nothing for the Union. On the contrary, we have often demonstrated that they do much against it. For a few weeks, recently, abolitionism, through its intrigues with Secretary Stanton and its majority in Congress, had practical control of the war power of the the government. Now, what possible good has it accomplished? Where is the abolition Genera who won a battle? Where are the negroes who were to rise against their masters at the issue of such a proclamation as that of Gen. Hunter? How many negroes have the abolitionists induced to join their black brigades? Gen. Hunter has obtained but four hundred negroes from three Slave States, though he has made his parade ground a camp meeting, and intersperses the military drill with religious hymns of which negroes are passionately fond. Where have the abolition plans for the war succeeded? When has abolitionism saved the State of the Union, as conservatism saved Kentucky and Maryland? When has abolitionism won back the State of the Union, as conservatism has won Missouri and Tennessee, and is fast winning Louisiana? At Hilton Head, where the abolitionists have had full swing, what have they done to restore the Union? Abolition intrigues have only resulted in defeats. Abolition interference with recruiting and with our armies has killed volunteering, and the very men who offered and refused a month ago now have to be sought for and hired with extra bounties. Abolitionism has even killed its own party, and driven such old fashioned abolitionists as Seward and Weed into a coalition with conservatives. The scum of the abolition faction only remains. Would gradual emancipation satisfy these fanatics? Would they cites for the President's bill in Congress? Is their 'support' with the trouble of asking for it? Is it worth more than the Union?"

And to be still further "impartial" why not indicate that the Border States, through their Representatives in Congress expressed themselves in the following manner:

"We have anxiously looked into this passage to discover its true import, but we are yet in painful uncertainty. How can we, by conceding what you now ask, relieve you and the country from the increasing pressure to which you refer? We will not allow ourselves to think that the proposition is, that we consent to give up slavery, to the end that the Hunter proclamation may be let loose on the Southern people, for it is too well known that we would not be parties to any such measure, and we have too much respect for you to imagine you would propose it. Can it mean that by sacrificing our interest in slavery we appease the spirit that controls that pressure, cause it to be withdrawn, and rid the country of the pestilent agitation of the slavery question? We are forbidden so to think, for that spirit would not be satisfied with the liberation of seven hundred thousand slaves, and cease its agitation, while three millions remain in bondage. Can it mean that by abandoning slavery in our States we are removing the pressure from you and the country, by preparing for a separation on the line of the cotton States? We are forbidden so to think, because it is known that we are, and we believe that you are, unalterably opposed to any division at all. We would prefer to think that you desire this concession as a pledge of our support, and thus enable you to withstand a pressure which weighs heavily on you and the country. Mr. President, no such sacrifice is necessary to secure our support. Confine yourself to your constitutional authority; confine your subordinates within the same limits; conduct this war solely for the purpose of restoring the Constitution to its legitimate authority; concede to each State and its loyal citizens their just rights, and we are wedded to you by indissoluble ties. Do this, Mr. President, and you touch the American heart and invigorate it with new hope. You will, as we solemnly believe, in due time restore peace to your country, lift it from despondency to a future of glory; and preserve to your countrymen, their posterity, and man, the inestimable treasure of constitutional government." 

The Decree of Emancipation (1862)

Source: The Pacific Commercial Advertiser. Honolulu: Thursday, October 16, 1862.

Since the rebellion in America culminated in the storming and capture of FORT SUMPTER, no more important event has transpired than that announced by the last advices, viz: the DECREE OF EMANCIPATION, issued on the 17th of september by President Lincoln. It inaugurates a new era in the war, and cannot help being accompanied by the most momentous results. The following is the report of this document, as abbreviated by the telegraph:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 22.-A proclamation issued by the President, the substance of which is as follows: 

------------------------------------------------------------

I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America, and Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy proclaim and declare that hereafter, as heretofore, the war will be prosecuted for the object of practically restoring the Constitutional relation between the United States, and the people thereof, in which states the relation of the States is or may be disturbed. It is my purpose at the next meeting of Congress to again recommend the adoption of practical measures tendering pecuniary aid to the States and people thereof who may not then be in rebellion against the United States, and which states may then have voluntarily adopted, or may voluntarily adopt, the immediate or gradual abolishment of slavery. That on the first day of January, 1863, all persons held as slaves within any state, or part of a state, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States; shall be then, thenceforth, and forever after free. On that day the Executive will designate by proclamation the States, and parts of states, in which the people shall be in rebellion. The fact that any State or part of a State shall on that day be in good faith represented in Congress chosen by a majority of the electors, shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed sufficient evidence that such States have not been in rebellion.  The President quotes the new article of war, approved March 30th; also, the 9th and 10th sections of the act to suppress insurrection and punish treason and rebellion, approved July 17th; and enjoins upon all persons in the military and naval service to enforce said acts and sections. The Executive will in due time recommend that all loyal persons shall, upon the restoration of Constitutional relations, be compensated for all losses by acts of the United States, including the loss of slaves. 

------------------------------------------------------------

It is idle to predict the effects which may follow this proclamation. Whatever they are, they cannot be other than of the most important nature of the future of the American Republic. It may be followed by immediate, certain and permanent separation between the north and the south, or it may hasten the suppression of the rebellion by exciting the rebels to such a desperation as to react to their own destruction, and the total extinction of slavery in America.

The President has held back as firmly and as long as it has been possible for him; but the fact that the proclamation of emancipation is now issued is evidence that he is satisfied that it is a step that is necessary to preserve the Union. Nine months ago, this journal stated as a result of its observation of the current of public opinion throughout the North, that if the rebellion continued to the close of 1862, a proclamation of emancipation would become a military necessity. The law of self-defense is the highest law known on earth. The man who refrains from using all means of self-defense in his power, when attacked with weapons of death by a midnight assassin or robber, (on the plea that he is a peace an,) deserves to be robbed or butchered. So with a nation. Any government which fails to use every means in its power to preserve its national integrity, when threatened with dismemberment, is unworthy of existence. This is the position of the American republic at this moment: and no law, human or divine, no constitution of any kind or nature, should be allowed to stand in the way of the natural order of self-preservation. 

The first question that will be asked, is, What will be the effect of the proclamation on the slaves? While it must be admitted that the authority of the government does not extend over any rebel territory, except nominally, yet it will not for that reason alone be powerless there. Before the first of january, 1863, when the decree goes into effect, the mass of the slaves will not that by a proclamation of the government they are legally free. This must lead to discontentment, which will everywhere develop itself, till finally, as in the case of the enslaved Israelites in Egypt, their masters will fain have them depart.

But the greatest result of the proclamation will be this, -that a decisive policy is adopted by the American government. The question for the North is now reduced to this, slavery and treason, or loyalty and freedom. Heretofore there has been any amount of skulking by partisans sympathizing with slavery and the rebellion under the plea of its being unconstitutional to meddle with slavery. There is to be an end to this: and the man who henceforward sands up for slavery because of the constitution, is a traitor to his country. He had better forswear his country and sell his birthright.

All Europe has been taunting America for its indecision on this slavery question. The proclamation will meet the unqualified approval of the masses of Europe, and at the same time disarm the politicians there of their strongest argument in favor of recognition of the South. There will be no recognition or intervention in favor of the south at present.

The coming few months will be the most important and the most stirring of the rebellion. The proclamation will excite the desperation of the rebel leaders to its highest pith, and the fight will be accompanied with an energy and terribleness not yet witnessed. Undoubtedly the next six months will witness either the triumph of the government, or the triumph of the rebels. The enormous efforts now being made by both the contending parties to increase their fighting resources, must soon reach their limit, beyond which they cannot go; and one or the other mist succumb, or acknowledge the contest useless. This can only be the rebels. 

The Present Commercial Panic in the United States, its Causes and its Effect Upon Us, Should the Same Continue (1861)

Source: The Polynesian. Saturday, January 19, 1861.

The last mail brought intelligence of a commercial crisis in the Atlantic seaboard States, which bids fair to surpass in its deplorable effects upon trade the revulsion of 1857, inasmuch as it is more extended in its influence, and springs from other than the natural causes which have governed part stringencies and collapses of markets. 

The pecuniary panic to which we allude has been mainly brought about by political causes, and the cloud at present no bigger than a man's hand may yet assume such a portentous aspect, that it will behoove every merchant to take in sail in time and get his ship of adventures under snug sail to meet the coming storm.

It is a pecuniary panic springing it is said from political causes, which is worse than one arising from financial derangements, because it is more difficult for business men to understand its workings, and to handle the matter. It is so Protean in the shapes it assumes, that no sooner is one phase met, than lo! another arises to bewilder the negotiant. In a few words, then, it appears from what we can gather from the public prints from the Northern, Southern and Western sections of that great Republic, that the South has initiated an attempt to commercially to cut clear from trading with the North. She has refused to take any manufactured goods from the North, and to accept nothing but gold for the balance of her last crop, and expresses a firm determination not to let a bale of the present crop go North, nor aloo a single article of goods manufactured at the North to come in at the South, thus virtually tabooing all commercial intercourse. This has produced an immediate derangement of inland and foreign exchanges always the commercial pulses that show the state of the fever that rages inwardly. The magnitude and intimacy of the commercial relations of the United States with all the world is so great, that whatever affects them may extend to those nations with whom they trade; and it is from this possibility, that a panic originating in the struggle between the North and South, is but the commencement of one of those great commercial revulsions, which may to some extent create embarrassment in pecuniary matters throughout the world.

The South, it is said, will not sell her cotton to England unless for gold. Should this be so, the Bank of England will raise its rates of interest to prevent its efflux, which in such an event will be followed by immense embarrassment and failures in that country. 

Should this estrangement of the South from the North continue, and end in secession, how will it effect us? If the South will not supply cotton to the North, for their manufactories, nor purchase northern manufactures when made, the Boston and New York manufactures will cease to give orders to the factories, and turn their capital to other branches of trade. These steps will compel the manufacturers to discharge their workmen, and stop their works. This will affect at once the price of oil, shutting it off as it will so great an outlet for the consumption of that article. 

Should the difficulties between the North and South end in disunion, sugar, rice, tobacco, cotton, and all the products of the Southern States, can be raised in our Kingdom, and they will immediately feel the impetus given by the disintegration of the United States to these articles, which, in the language of the Southern States "is King." 

Louisiana, which has always controlled the sugar interests in the Republic, and used her influence to keep up the duties, will belong to the Southern Confederacy, and the North, the great consumer, will probably admit our sugars duty free. This course and the difficulties there, would immediately bring further capital and emigration to our shores, and lead to a development of the industrial resources of our islands. 

But the foregoing reasonings may all be conjectures, nevertheless, it is impossible for the careful business man to look at the state of affairs at present existing in the United States, and the tone of the most conservative of its journals, to avoid shuddering at the distress which, commercially, is in prospect, should it continue.

Polynesian Editorial: Saturday, June 1, 1861

Source: The Polynesian. Honolulu: Saturday, June 1, 1861

The news from the United States and Europe, which we publish to-day, is of the most ominous and important nature. That civil war should be a fact where civil liberty is a principle of action, is one of those sad and fearful animal which the human mind is now and then called upon to reconcile as best it may. We do not see that the principle of government is changed to-day from what it was yesterday, either North or South, yet brother rises against brother, the cry of blood is upon every lip, and to slay or be slain is the watchword of the hour. Where is "the sober, second thought of the people," the armed omnipotence of justice and right, the truth elicited by free discussion, which were the glorious characteristics of that free, self-governing people? Is it too late at this hour and after eight months of the most thorough discussion on both sides of "the approaching crisis," its consequences and its remedies, to say that the people are led by professional, interested and unscrupulous politicians. The recruiting stations attest the popular sentiment in either section as plainly and as truly as ever did the electoral urn.

As one stands upon the theoretical platform of constitutional right, the other side stands upon the practical platform of revolutionary right, and the constitutional bridge of amendment is broken by the precipitancy of the one and the unwillingness of the other to read the Constitution as it was read in the earlier days when the Southerner dwelt unmolested in the north, and the Northerner meddled not with the institutions and usages of the South. But, to whatever cause, to however remote a period the present difficulties in the United States may be traced, the present disruption of the political ligatures is a solemn, serious, unquestionable fact which we fear no violent measures will ever allay or heal. In the contest now begun we do not doubt for a moment the superiority of the North in men and material, but, granted that they succeed, how will they make the South, if the South is true to itself, reenter the Union unless by garrisoning their towns and overawing the people by military demonstrations and dragonades; and when the spirit of the South shall be broken, and it submits to the yoke, which it says has galled its neck for thirty years, what then becomes of the principle of liberty, which both parties invoke; in what will the South be better off than the Hungarians, the Venetians, the Poles, or other conquered nationalities, who are forced to accept a government not of its own making, and a government with interests and sympathies opposed to its own? The good book tells us not to answer a fool according to his folly, and when wisdom counseled other means, it is a sad and sorrowful comment on the spirit and civilization of the age, that in the United States, of all countries on the globe, civl disputes should have been referred to the arbitrament of the sword-an argument which even the autocrat of all the Russias is unwilling to employ against the insurgent Poles. 

Christian Sentiments? (1861)

Source: The Polynesian. Honolulu: Saturday, June 1, 1861

The California Christian Advocate, speaking of the state of the Union, says:

"We have never counseled war. We have hoped and prayed for peace, but we have loved our country and determined to stand by the government in every emergency. We now repeat what we have before published, that if it were better that a million lives should be scarified than that government should fall by the hands of traitors."

The italics are ours:

The Advocate never counsels war; no-that would be wicked and unchristian. But it instills in the minds of its tens of thousands of readers that " it were better that a million of lives should be scarified" rather than abate one iota of-what?-moral principles or civil rights? No, neither; but of political pretensions. While such pious aspirations are uttered by so religious a journal as the Advocate in the far West, Mr. Sickles, M.C., in the far East, of whom the world heard for much a couple of years ago, second the motion and thinks that the whole South ought to be wiped off the face of the earth. Extremes meet. 

Iron-Plated Vessels an American Invention (1862)

Source: The Polynesian. Honolulu: Saturday, June 7, 1862.

Now that it is obvious that the iron-plated vessels are destined to effect a complete revolution in naval and coast warfare-the greatest change in the art of war since the invention of gunpowder-it ought to be a source of national pride that the idea originated in our own country. The United States gave the world the steamboat, the cotton gin, the electric telegraph, the anesthetic chloroform, the reaping machine, the cylinder press, and many other of the grandest prizes of peace; it is now to be written that the same land of the free has furnished war with the most important appliance of modern time. 

The real inventor in this case is Robert L. Stevens, and so history will recognize it. He projected his iron-plated floating battery for the protection of New York harbor nearly twenty years ago. It was he whose representations stimulated the Emperor Napoleon to undertake the construction of the iron-clad batteries and frigates which are so rapidly becoming the most formidable part of the French navy. We do not make this statement simply on American authority. Sixteen months ago the London Quarterly Review, the Tory organ of England, ever bitter in its hostility to anything American, in an article on "Iron Sides and Wooden Walls," had the frankness to say:

"As long ago as 1845, the late Mr. Stevens, the designer and builder of some of the the best and speediest American steamers, made a long series of experiments at the expense of the American Government, to ascertain and measure the resistance of iron plates to shot and shell. The result then arrived at was that plates less than an inch in thickness would resist the impact of any shell then known, and that a thickness of six inches of iron was impenetrable to every projectile that was brought against it, no matter how great the velocity, or how short the distance at which it was fired. These results were freely communicated to scientific men, both in Paris and in London, by Mr. Stevens in his visits to those capitols. Here they fell on stony ground, BUT IN PARIS THEY WERE FOLLOWED UP, and when the Crimean War broke out Napoleon III, who, like his great Uncle, has always been a great artillerist, and is skilled in the theory of projectiles, brought his knowledge to bear on the subject, and designed a class of iron-plated vessels known as the floating batteries of 1854. The French built six of these, and as we were requested by our ally to do otherwise, we literally copied his design without any alteration, but we did so most unwillingly, and our vessels were not ready in time to be of service. The French batteries, however, were actually employed in the reduction of Kinburn, and with a degree of success which the most sanguine could hardly have anticipated. Although under the fire of heavy guns for a considerable time, they came out absolutely scatheless, having answered in every respect the purposes for which they were designed. We never used ours and did not like them, and they were left to rot. The case, however, was widely different in France, and it is most curious and should be most instructive to observe the opposite courses which naval architecture has since taken in the two countries. It might be imagined a priori that from the moment THIS GREAT DISCOVERY had been made in naval construction, and had been established by experience, our Admiralty would have known at once how enormous were the advantages we might promptly derive from it, and how much more the discovery was calculated to establish our supremacy at sea than to give any advantage to France."

The Emperor Napoleon followed up this demonstration of the superiority of iron-plated vessels with great energy, but the English were still incredulous. Up to the last year, the Admiralty and all the dockyard authorities insisted that iron vessels for war purposes could not succeed. Mr. Howard Douglas, the eminent author of "Naval Gunnery," considered the best authority in England, in the last edition of his work gave it as his opinion that wooden vessels are still to be preferred to iron for naval purposes. The Edinburgh Review, but one year ago declared, emphasizing it too with italics, that, "throughout the long series of experiments which have been made, no iron plate has yet been manufactured which effectively resists the impact of a 68-pounder fired with a charge of sixteen pounds of powder. The Monitor, the other day, received from the Merrimac the "impact" of scores of one-hundred pounders, from Armstrong guns, too, without feeling it. By her success in wounding the stern of the Merrimac she demonstrated that the Warrior, the only British iron-cased vessel yet afloat, would be no match for her; since the Warrior is heavily plated only on her broadsides-her bow and her stern, for a considerable distance fore and aft, being formed of plates of only 1 1-4 inch thickness.

But the English Admiralty have now fairly awakened to the necessity of going energetically into the work of building iron-plated ships of war. In the late debate on the naval estimates, Lord Paget stated that they had fifteen such ships now in the course of construction, of which eleven would be afloat in the course of the present year. Some are great of size, ranging from 3,688 to 6,621 tons; but their size only makes them the more unwieldy, and, as demonstrated in Hampton Roads the other day, will prove a positive disadvantage. The Merrimac was four times the size of the Monitor, and was all the sooner worsted. The English and French vessels thus far built and planned-so far at least as we know-have other inferior features. They lie high in the water, instead of just rising above the surface like the Monitor, and are more easily hit. Their plates are laid vertically or nearly so, and thus will receive to impact of the shot at right angles, instead of obliquely, as in the case of the Monitor. The they are not only more easily hit, but, when hit, the shot must fell upon them with vastly greater effect.

Americans, then, through Stevens, were the first to conceive and apply the principle of making vessels of war invulnerable by the use of iron; and, through Ericsson, they have been foremost in seizing upon all the conditions of that principle, and, in the quickest time, turning them to the best accounts. History will record this to their honor.-
N.Y. World. 

[From Fraser's Magazine] English Opinion on Slavery and the War in the United States: (1862)

Source: The Polynesian. Honolulu: Saturday, June 28, 1862.

The most disagreeable feature in the war, if it come upon us now, will be the support which we shall be compelled to give to the Slave States. It will be an odious position for us, to be defending a system with arms which we have long and loudly condemned; and we shall be told scornfully the old story what we have no policy but as interest dictates.

England stands clear enough in the question of slavery to bear language of this kind without very much feeling it. One regret, however, would be keener than it is, were the civil war in any sense a war for the benefits of the slave. But the humanity of the North is as 'the tender mercies of the wicked.' The negro of South Carolina is his master's chattel; but for the most part he is treated as a fellow creature. The free black of the North is a Pariah, from whose touch the New Yorker shrinks as a contamination. The Republican party hate slavery not because the slave is oppressed; but because they have no interest in slave labor, and the existence of it is a reproach to their country. As the case grows more desperate, the abolition cry will become louder, and before long it will be no fault of Fremont and his friends if there is not a servile insurrection. But the freed negroes will be no nearer to their rights as human beings. The President already hints at deportation; and other talk insolently of their elimination by 'natural selection.' We who profess to have some real interest in the negro, need feel small interest in the success of the Abolitionists of Massachusetts; and if the poor African is ever to receive god from the more advanced races, he must be permitted to associate with them in some form or another, in some relation or another. If they turn him from their sight, he will die or become a savage again. The world has outgrown slavery and condemned it; but the long crime in which we too have our share, will not be atoned for merely by declaring it at an end; by robbing the owner of his slave's services, and leaving the slave to what fate may do for him. It is with man as it is with the lower creatures. The horse and the cow, the sheep and the pig, multiply and are cared for, because they will domesticate ad make themselves useful; the wolves and jackals, even nobler wild beasts, are killed off as nuisances. And like them, too, the Red Indian, the Australian, the New Zealander, who will not bend to the yoke of civilization, dwindle and perish, by the 'natural selection' to which the Americans will consign the negro; while notwithstanding the negro has been the one exception in all the wild races with which we have come in contact. He tames easily. He works well. He becomes docile, gentle, humorous; and his numbers multiply faster than in his native forests. If he be made free only to be thrust away from intercourse with the whites, his natural habits will come back over him, he will be forced into the condition which the wilder savage chooses, and by the same law will perish.

The happiest fortune for the Southern slaves will be to remain on their plantations, still cared for as they have been, and still giving their services as they have hitherto given them, if only the condition of their service can be improved. Many things have been done for them far short of emancipation, as the proper and wholesome preparation for it. They may be made adscripti glebae, annexed to the soil, and be no longer in danger f being sold away from their homes. The laws may be softened which interfere with their education. The laws may be strengthened which protect them from brute usage. Their evidence may be admitted in courts of justice. They may be allowed to acquire property. They may have days given them when their labor shall be their own, and they may be allowed to buy their freedom. When they are no longer irritated by Northern fanatics, the planters may find it in their interest to consent to such measures as these; and slavery may disappear at last as serfdom has disappeared from Europe, leaving the negro able to keep and to care for himself.

At all events, even in this aspect of the civil war, there is no such manifest right on one side, or such manifest wrong on the other, that we are to be kept by these accidental and collateral considerations from standing by our own flag. The magnitude of an injury is not measured by the actual harm inflicted. And the nation which will not or cannot makes its rights respected is on the road to ruin.