Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-09-17

We certainly wish that all men could be free"
made free indeed" by partaking of the spirit of
Him who into the world to seek and to
save that which was lost" But we would not
wish to wage war for the purpose of making men
Christians and just as little, in war for the Con-
stitution and the Union-a war which is lawful
and right only so far as it is for the Consti-
tuition and the Union-are we willing to bring
for what, we conceive both our political and our
moral duty, We have no right to wage war-the
emancipation of slaves. All admit that it would
not have been justifabe for the Northern States
to commence war the Southern States for the
purpose Of abolishing slavery in them. 1t would
have been nothing less than organized murder to
commence such war-as John Brown did COM
mence it and suffered murderer's punishment.
BY what reasoning, then, does it become less than
murder to divert commenced for other purposes
to that objectY How can it be any less criminal
to prolong war commenced for the assertion of
the just authority Of the Government into war
for the suppression Of slavery, which it is agreed
would have been unjustifable and sinful if begun
for that purpose? AS is well said by one of our
contemporaries, than which, we may add, no other
journal more heartily sustains the war for the
Union,"
IF there possibility of peace and the restoration
OF the power Of the Government and instead of making
peace, should say No, will have no peace till we
have destroyed slavery and should continue the war the
men thus doing would be precisely guilty if they had
commenced war for that purpose only"
This war is just only so far as it is defensive
war. All wars just only SO far as they are de-
fensve, for precisely At the point where they cease
to be defensive they become aggressive, and, as
such, are equally opp ,sed to morals and to chris
tianity. No one sees This clearly than the Pre-
sident and hence tho carefulness with which he
has uniformly declared that, SO far as concerns his
theory of action, he does or omits to do whatever
he does or omits to do with regard to the negro
because he believes it "helps the Union" He may
be mistaken in the means adapted to reach the
end he has in view, but he has never suffered the
end to be left out of his sight. Would that all his
professed political friends had been, or now were,
equally single in their aim Instead of this, we
find some of them pervertng his means into ends,
and seeking to transform his temporary military
expedients into lines of enduring political policy.
And this brings us to consider the Presidents
observations on his I" Proclamation of Freedom"
1t is worthy of particular remark that the Presi-
dent has not word to say in defence of this de-
caration principle. He treats it throughout
as simply an administrative expedent. This will
clearly appear from the terms he employs in de-
scribing its operation and effect. Hesays:
''You dislike the emancipation proclamation and per-
haps you would have it retracted You say it is
stitutional think differently think the Constitution
invests its commandments with the law of
time of war. The that be said If MUCH that
saSes property Is there has there been any gues
tion that By the lao of property both of and
friends may be taken aohen needed? And is needed
rohenerer taking helps hnrts the enemy? Armies.
the world over destroy enemies property when they
not use it, and destroy their to keep from the
enemy. Civilized beligerents do all in their power to
help themselves hut the enemy, except few things
regarded barbarous cruel Among the exceptions
the of vanqushed foes and combatants
male and female But the proclamation law either is
valid or is not valid II it is not valid it needs
ton Ift is valid cannot be retracted any more than
the dead can be brought to life
Here it will be seen that the President defends
the proclamation, not as theoretical measure, but
as something identical with the practical use
of slave property for military purposes. Our
readers know that if the proclamation means no
more than this, it has no objections to encounter
from us, and it is noteworthy that the argument of
the President extends no farther than this in usti
fcation Of the edict We have never denied that
the President, as commander-in- chief of the army
and navy, may, in time of armed rebellion against
the authority and Government of the United States,
and while conducting on slaveholding territory,
rghtfully lberate slaves far may be necessary
to the success of his military operations And the
measure of his power in this direction may be ad-
mitted to be commensurate with the military ne
cessity under which he acts, and with the extent
to which no oan practically employ in services
auxiliary to his operations the slaves whom he ac
tually liberates.
But it is denied by many (and we arc of their
number) that the Executive department of the
Government has the right to "ordcr and declare"
that slaves now held to service By Virtue of
State TAGS shall, day fixed, be " then, thence
forward and forever free" For this style of Ian
guagc proceeds on the assumption that the Execu-
tive branch Of the Government is, because Of the
enlarged powers conferred upon it in the name of
" military necessity" or claws of war;" endowed
with legitimate authority to repeal or suspend the;
lars of certain States as respects s1avery It i'm