The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-18 00:00:00

THE FOURTH OF MARCH.

The approaching inauguration of a new Govern-
ment to conduct the affairs of 20,000,000 of men--
and which in the days of our children's child en may
rule over 100,000,000 of men—is, one would sup-
pose, an event that must command the attention of
the world. And the supposition is correct. On the
continent of America the 4th of March next is looked
forward to as one of the few days in a century preg-
nant with mighty changes which in all time to come
will be a greatlandmark in history. In Europe states-
men, and all those who have any political intelli-
gence, are discussing and thinking about the cere-
mony that will be performed in Washington on the
4th March next. On that day Abraham Lincoln will
be inaugurated as the first President of the section
of the old United States which still retains the old
name. In vain do some Federal partisans in this
country try to deny this position. Sophistry
can weave no web that will conceal the fact. The
people of the Federal States, if not by words, ac-
knowledge it by their acts. They may not be quite
sure that Europe will, on and after the 4th of
Ikiarett;lslll6olTWllW Confederate States, but they
know that on and after that day there will be no
pretence for saying that the Government of Wash-
ington has any legal or constitutional right to claim
dominion over the States of the South. Hence the
haste to secure if possible an immediate peace, and
hence the rumours of recognition that are rife both
in Europe and America. At such a juncture it may
be desirable to set forth the position of Europe with
respect to the two great Confederations of America.
It is utterly impossible for any one to invent any
pretext to justify the assumption that after the 4th
of March next Mr. Lincoln will be President of the
Southern as well as of the Northern States. Mr.
Lincoln is an elected magistrate, and has no here-
ditary right to rule the States -of the South. He
has not been elected President by the Southern
States—or to put it more forcibly, the Southern
States have taken no part in his election. What
other claim then can Mr. Lincoln urge? Not that of
conquest, for 'the South is not conquered. There are
only three titles to sovereignty known amongst men
—hereditary descent, conquest, and election. No in-
genuity can devise a fourth title. Will any one pre-
tend that Mr. Lincoln is the hereditary ruler over
the South? Will any one pretend that Mr. Lincoln
is the ruler over the South by virtue of conquest ?
Will any pretend that Mr. Lincoln is ruler over the
South by the title of election ?
In despair some Federal partisans in Europe have
cried out that the South might have taken part in
the election if she would. The Federal Congress has
in a most formal and solemn manner refuted this

feeble suggestion. The constitution of the United
States decrees as follows respecting the election for
President, the only action in which the several sove-
reign States of the Federation participate simultane-
ously, and which is indeed the only national act:—
, " Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legisla-

ture thereof may direct, a, number of electors equal to the
whole number of senators and representatives to which the
State may be entitled in Congress.. . The person having

the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such
number be a majority of the whole number of electors ap-
pointed. . . If no person have a majority, then, from the
five highest in the list, the said house (of Representatives)
shall in like manner (by ballot) choose the President. But
in choosing the President the votes shall be taken by States,
the representative from each State having one vote. A
quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or mem-
bers from two-thirds of the States, and a majority of all the
States shall be necessary to a choice."
In January last the United States Congress de-
creed that only 24 States should take part in the
November election, and as the 24 included the
bogus State of Western Virginia, the congressional
decree forbade 11 of the 34 States from taking part
in the election. Nor is that all. The Federal
House of Representatives has lately adopted a reso-
lution that the States of Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia,
Alabama, Floirda, South Carolina, North Carolina,
Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas shall be
excluded from the electoral count of the votes for
President and Vice President of the United States.
Does not this in a most emphatic and legal manner
bar the South from taking part in the Presidential
election ? Does it not prove that Mr. Lincoln, who
is not the hereditary sovereign of the South, nor the
sovereign of the South by right of conquest, is not
sovereign of the South by virtue of election ? And
since there is not a fourth title to sovereignty, is not
the action of the United States Congress a de facto
recognition of the separation of the South from the
North ? There is not a statesman in Europe who
does not give an affirmative reply to these questions.
We have maintained, and history will maintain,
that the South had a legal right to recognition as an
independent Confederacy as soon as the act of seces-
sion was accomplished ; but we do not deny that
there was a flimsy argument against recognition, or
rather in favour of recognising the title of Mr. Lin-
coln as supreme magistrate of thG 34 States,because
the 34 States took part in his election. But after
the 4th of March next the recognition of Mr. Lin-
coln as the President of the United States cannot
and will not involve his recognition as the chief ma-
gistrate of the Southern States. What then is to be
done respecting the South ? In each of the Confe-
derate States there is a regular governmentin
ll
operation, and there is as much order and law
con.
as
there is in England or France. There are largeN
rth
federate armies in the field, and between the o
and South there is a cartel ex—Al/lige' The

The yellow book, so much talked about as con-
taining important diplomatic documents, was dis-
tributed to-day to the senators and deputies of the
Corps Legislatif. Its contents comprise nine de-
spatches upon the affairs of the Elbe Duchies ; 17
upon Italian and Roman matters, besides the Con-
vention of September 15 and its supplement ; two
despatches upon the annexation of the lonian
Islands to Greece, with the Treaty of November 14,
1863, and that of March 29, 1864 ; two despatches
upon the affairs of Romania, with the protocol of
the Conference of June 28, 1864, the additional
article to the Convention of 1858, and the explana-

tion of the principles intended to serve as bases for
a new electoral law ; five despatches upon Syrian
affairs; the text of the arbitration judgment given
by the Emperor in the Isthmus of Suez question ;
four despatches relating to Tunis ; eight despatches
referring to Japan, with the Convention concluded
at Paris, June 20, 1864, between the French Minis-
ter for Foreign Affairs and the Japanese Ambassa-
dors ; and eight despatches or circulars referring to
commercial matters.

The yellow book also contains the following de-
spatch from M. Drouyn de Lhuys to. Count de
Sartiges at Rome, Fomp4iniug

letter_;

addressed by the Papal Nuncio at Paris to two
French bishops :

" Faris, Feb. 8, 1865.

"M. le Comte,—The Government of the Emperor has
aeon in the newspapers, with painful surprise,, two letters
written by the Apostolic Nuncio, ono to the Bishop of
Orleans, congratulating him upon his pamphlet relative to
the Convention of the 15th September and to the Ency-
clical of the Bth of December ; the other to the Bishop of
Poitiers, approving his pastoral.
"In this twofold step the Nuncio has gravely compro-
mised the character with which he is invested. In address-
ing himself to the French bishops, to appreciate and direct
their conduct with regard to the Imperial Government, his
excellency has overstepped his attributes, which, according
to French publiclaw, could only be those of an ambassador.
But an ambassador fails in his most essential duty when
he encourages, by his approbation, resistance to the laws of
the country in which he resides, and criticism of the acts
of the Government to which he is accredited.

"It is true that in the explanations his excellency has
given me upon this matter he has disavowed the publica-
tion of these letters, which he attributes to blamable indis-
cretion. But the Government of the Emperor has a right
to complain of the fact itself. It hopes, therefore, that the
Court of Rome, in its wisdom, will not permit the renewal
of similar errors, which the Emperor's Government is fur-
ther determined not to tolerate.

"You will be good enough, M. le Comte, to read this
despatch to his Eminence the Cardinal Secretary of State.
—Receive, &c.,

(Signed) " DROUTN DE LliUltS."
PARIS, Feb. 17.

Among the documents contained in the Yellow
Book is noticeable a despatch of M. Drouyn de
Lhuys to the Due de Gramont, dated September
26. It gives an account of an interview of the
French Minister for Foreign Affairs with Count
Mulinen, the Austrian Charge at Paris. The latter
having expressed the surprise of Austria " that
the Government of the Emperor desired to arrange
the Roman question with Italy, without the parti-
cipation of any other Catholic Power, and without
consulting the Pope as principally interested," M.
Drouyn de Lhuys endeavours in his reply to show
that the arrangement spoken of does not involve a
solution of the Roman question, that it does not
change the general situation of Italy, and that it is
only "the substitution of a new modus invendi for
a system of which we have experienced the incon-
veniences." These explanations are supplemented
by a short lecture on the Austrian Government,
from which it is easy to perceive the determination
of France to prevent any interference in the penin-
sula hostile to the Italian kingdom. The despatch
concludes as follows :

" I told M. de Mulinen that I believed myself able to dis-
pense with replying to Count Rechberg's remark as to the
secrecy we had thought it advisable to observe towards the
Court of Rome, upon the ground of ' only being bound to
give an explanation, were any asked, to the Government of
his Holiness. I added, however, that we had made known
at Rome, so soon as we thought opportune, the motives
which had inspired our determination and the acts which
had been their result. In acting thus we are convinced of
having regarded the susceptibilities of honour and the
scruples of conscience of the Court of Rome far better than
we should have done by placing it in a position to bring
forward objections and absolute statements of non-accept-
ance which it would not have been possible for us to take
into account. We stipulated in our own name, but in what
appeared to us,the interest of the Roman Government, for
guarantees we needed to protect our responsibility in our
own eyes ; we had nothing to ask of, or to impose upon,
the Court of Rome, and it remains entirely free in itsdeter-
mination with regard to the arrangements we have con_
eluded with Italy. .
thtaht,e As to
of tvheferen
Cabinet' occupation of
na,servlepowinetehda voeu out to
upon tuna ppor-
Rome, we had only ourselves to c
not being allied with any one relatiovnegutolt
ournctaouinnetd
mtuorinaernds
but of which we alone
ing of which we claim the honoiu
was further compelled to
tuneness and the manner of putting
rnu ond to an rtak-
had supported the expense.
loc occasion to indicate to the Auf3-
point out that, having itidaesasocs
wiahteosietswiadsdvoicem
made
with ours to cause to
Pknowledged at other periods, and
trian Government our
Austria herself had
whose app desire
rhoav ai 1 at to Romesee
of which I hadpleasure • in recog-
nising these overtures—and . d
application shaeehad recommended, the reply
courtesy--testified more prudence and circum-
spection on the part of the Cabinet of Vienna than eager-
ness with us into any agreement whatever to enter with
regard to the affairs of Rome.—Receive," &c.
The despatch which follows explains even more
clearly the reasons which determined the French
Government to treat with the Cabinet of Turin
without the Pontifical Government. M. Drouyn
de Lhuys wrote on the Ist October to M. de
Sartiges :

"The reception your communication has encountered,