The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-09-18

MR.. lNGERsoLL's NEW WORK.

The new book of Charles ]. Ingersoll, esq, OF
Philadelphia, on the late war, will appear from the
press Of Lee q Blanchard in few days We are
indebted to those gentlemen for the sheets of this
long -ooked-for book and are thus enabled to make
some extracts from its interesting pages. MIR. In
gersoll, the author Of this volume, well known to
the American people as an accomplished and learn
ed man, and sound and influential statesman.
His contributions to our national literature his ju-
dcia writings, and his speeches in Congress, prove
him TO be person of powers, and possessed OF
a most cultivated mind His style is peculiar, and
vet is attractive from its freshness and originality.
His manner of speaking is highly attractive; for he
has cultivated to the highest degree the gift of colo
qua oratory; and it is admitted that there were few
men in the late Congress whose views on all great
questions were attractively delivered or, when
published, more popular with the country Mr.
Ingerso has been greatly abused by his political
opponents, but there are few who refuse to do JUS
tce to his remarkable talents. He has been pro-
claimed "a demagogue; and yet there no public man
who has dared to speak out more boldly He has
been styled exquisite; and yet his dress is Of the
plainest, though sometimes of peculiar character.
In all his life, there is little for him to regret in what
he has done. - S
AS member of the legislature of his State in
his early days. as member of the reform conven-
ton, and as a member Of Congress, he has not
failed to prove himself worthy Of the applause, the
admiration, and the confidence of his constituents.
The work on the late war, about ts be published
by Messrs. Lea & Blanchard, of Philadelphia, is
mad ~, oLa n in olIo nd
political circles. 1t abounds in new and neve-be-
fore-pubshed facts; and it talks of those which are
well known in singuarly pleasing manner. OF
the legislation during that memorable period, Mr..
Ingersol speaks from what he knew for he was
contemporary with most of the great minds of the
country and served in the national legislature through
the war Congress There is, withal, about his book,
air Of freshness that is indescrbably winning and
calculated to make ample amends for occasional dry
and dull details.
We willnot pretend to extract as copiously from
the work its merits Deserve but will confne our
selves such portions Of will give our readers
an idea Of its commanding interest, and the large
space 1t is destined hereafter to occupy in the pub
lie mind. The extract subjoined is fair specimen
Of the authors style, as well as Of the materials,
spirit and plan of his book 1t strikes u.s. that no
thing could be finer than the consummate ability
and skill with which this programme is sketchcd:
"The war of the revolution began in tumut and
rebellion; was waged by the imposition of martial
law for regular authority; and closed by an act Of
national bankruptcy, leaving an imperfect union OF
barely confederated States, disconnected and exani
mate, poor and intractable. During the revolution
the country was rent by civil discord; the tories
rnud with ,1aadt he lox.
The war of 1872 soemnly declared in constitutions
al method, was waged in due subordination to law,
opposed on less ustifabIe grounds, and terminated
with manifold deliberations, since as generally ac-
knowedged as those Of the peace of independence.
Commerce, manufactures, navigation, agriculture,
national character, the respect of other nations,
(Great Britain especially and confidence in repub.
can institutions, till then by means great even
among Americans themselves, derived from less
than three years Of excitement by war, advantages
which peace could not have conferred. The war OF
the revolution left unpaid national debt of neal
$50 millions Of dollars; whereas, not long after the
war of 1872, a debt of 1913 millions was paid Al,
American historian (Ramsey) considers that the
talents Of the people of the United States were i'm
proved by the war of the revolution but that thei
morals were dcterioratcd. The physical and menta
capacities of the country were all advanced by The
war of 1912, without moral or political detrinnen
The government since has been as republican a:
before; while the tone Of public and private
morality has been much impaired by long
peace since, than il was by that war; Like the
revolution, the war of 1912 was inevitable and
defensive; put off longer, before extorted from nol-
cradle wrongs; undertaken for vndication, NOT ag-
grandizement, although Canadian conquest was to
be one of its means. The cause was as Just; the
preparation greater also the forbearance; and the
consequences as beneficial Moral, physical, and
mental independence were achievements of the con-
fct Of 1912, as much as political emancipation tina,
Of ITS. The common, perhaps salutnry impress
sion that the revolution was more unanimously
supported, is mistake. The majorities in Con-
gress, on all the essential principles in 1774, were
extremely small The Declaration Of independence
was carried with difficulty, if not by accident Mos
of the great questions of measures and men from
i774 to 177s were decided in Congress by the vote
of single State, and that often by the vote of one
man. The nation was more divided in the war o.
the revolution than in that of 1872 There was nc
overt treason in the latter.
.Destiny seems to delight to bring about great re-
suits from insignificant and doubtful beginnings-in
explicable commotons, like vast CONGREGATIONS from
mere sparks 1t may be questioned whether any
great revolution originated with the will of major
ity. Where freedom prevails, submission Of mi
noriies to ostensible majorites becomes funda
mental doctrine. However small the majority, j
means all the nation. In monarchies, the monarch
or his minister rules instead of the majority. In
pubcs that mysterious and overriding power, thu
sovereignty Of the people, nowhere, felt every
where, resides in mere majority; and in war, as wal
the casen that Of 1872 large acrimonious minorities
which exasperate, may corroborate the majority ant
elicit great national exploits. Republicans deride tn,
dogma Of kings divine right Americans can hard
ly comprehend II. Their government rests on al
antagonist principle. Yet philosophioally analysed
is the sovereignty of the people perfectly obvious
Invisible and intangible reality governing ALL wher
is it palpable' Directly it makes Of the laws
which il is indirectly the sole author. 1t is diffuse
throughout the mass whose will begeis and con
trolls public opinion by individual agency, and il
voice may be compafed to that Of the Deity il
power, inscrutable and irresponsible. War be
tween the principles Of popular sovereignty and tn
divine right of kings, begun by the American Decar
alton of independence has spread over nearly all tn
New, and much of the Old World. Whatever b
the fact, maorities at least supposed TO govern
and mnores to submit The wars of ITS an
1912 between Great Britain and the United States d
America, were waged by nations both acknowledg
ing the sovereignty Of the people. Probably tn
English and American commonwealth, in rebellion
against established governments, united the mos