The Portland daily press., 1862-10-10
For the Daily Press
Disloyalty Of the Advertiser.

[For the Daily Press.
Disioyalty of the Advertiser.
1t is but few days since the Advertiser
boosted that it had never been true Admin
istratoin paper until the 1st Of January last,
when it became the property Of its present
| proprietors: yet within those few days it
has insidously attacked every prominent
measure of the Government. Witness its ar
tclcs against the proclamation Of emancipa-
ton. See the sophistry of that article in which
it runs a parallel between the claim of the
Government against Great Britain for the pay
ment of certain slaves of the United States,
emancipated by her in the war of 1872 and
the present emancipation act, citing the cor
respondence Of John Quincy Adams TO show
that the emancipation of slaves was contrary
to international law. Admit that it isis
this an international war? Ii the Advertiser
admits that the Confederate States constitute
an independent nation, then the cases are par
allel, otherwise not. But it must admit the
doctrine of secession first. International law
is the common usage between separate and
independent nations, from the necessity of the
case, because they are separate and independ-
ent, and cannot dictate law to each other
The last war with England was war against
separate and independent government, and
Mr.. Adams, in behalf of this country, claimed
that the arbitrator, Russia, should decide that
England should pay the value of certain slaves
freed by them in that war. W
But here we have no international law. We
have Constitution to govern US. This is a
civil war, a rebellion of a portion of our own
people TO destroy the government,-to destroy
the Constitution, and by logical deduction, if
an international war forbds the emancipation
of slaves, war which is not international, but
civil-the opposite-does not forbid the eman-
cipation OF the slaves of traitors.
The editorial of the Advertiser of Oct. 9th
attacked the leading acts of our Government,
and breaches conservatism. Here is an as
sassin, with his arm raised to plunge the knife
in the heart OF the Republic; and the blow
can be arrested, the arm of the assassin para
lyzed, by the emancipation of the siave-and
the Advertiser cries out, "Forbear. don't do
it; ii may hurt the assassin; SO do, pray, be
conservative In the article in that paper on
Forced Social ketutions,' what is the sub
stance of it? Why, that the emancipation of
the slave will destroy the social equilibrium
of the rebels: therefore it is wrong. Or, In
other words, don't paralyze the arm of the as
sassin, it may hurt him; rather let him destroy
your life.
Among other measures, the Advertiser at
tacks the suspension of the habeas corpus act
BY the President,-the very measure which
the other day it glorified itself for endorsing,
when 1t claimed that since January 1st it had
entirely supported President Lincoln's admin
istration. But why does it attack the emanci-
patton act as an abolition one, when it knows
that it was supported by large majority in
both houses OF Congress-by the Cabinet-by
the people. Are they abolitionists who were
not before, or has the Advertiser turned dis
loyal? Why attack the present policy Of
the Government, when it has all along claimed
that there were but two parties HOW, the 10y
al men, and the traitors? Thus the Advertis-
tr has arrayed itself against the Government,
and with the traitors. Let me ask every can
did reader, then, where does the writer OF the
late attack on the Government belong? Is
he pleading for the Union, or the rebels p
Does not every article show that he is advo-
eating the side of the traitors? His articles
are better adapted for the Charlestown Mer-
curry, or the Richmond Inquirer, than the pure
air Of freedom. His articles emanate from the
mind of pettiiogger, not "a statesman. His
basis of action is toe base for patriot. He
knows that the Presidents proclamation of
freedom has gone forth with the approval of
the great body Of the people of the loyal
States, and cannot be recalled. Why, then,
insidiously attack il? Has such a man the
good of his country at heart? We lear not.
Why that insidious article the other day UNI
der the caption of What has the negro done
for the white man?' He forgets the noble
daring of the negro, Robert Smalls, who ran
the rebel steamerout of the harbor of Charles
ton, under the guns of the rebel batteries, to
onr feet He ignores the fact that three
quarters Of onr important Information of the
rebel armies aud plans, we have derived from
when Gen. Fremont in the southwest declared
the slaves Of rebels free, his proclamation was
revoked, Fremont recalled. and Gen. Halleck
appointed to that command, who Immediately
issued his famous Order, No. 3, prohibiting ne
groes entering our lines. He forgets that Gen.
Hunters proclamation, giving freedom to the
slaves, of rebels, was also countermanded by
the President. In other words, he forgets
that till now the action of the Government,
has been to forbid the slave doing anything
for us.
Why, in a late number of the Advertiser,
does the editor array portions of the Consti-
tution OF the United States in a general way,
a snaky way, unless il be ito steal the livery
of heaven 10 serve the devil % Z. ii. I.
IF The Argus often holds up its hands in
holy horror if an intimation is made that any
favorite General is not perfect or all that he