Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1864-04-01
H.incoln's suppIementto his Amnes-
Nv ProcInmafion--HHow One of
z his own Radical Organs Views


his own Radical Organs Views
It. -
2 All the world has been amused with the
pronunciamentoes Of Mexican Emperors,
Presidents and Generals. But since this
war began, our President and Generals
have borne of the palm in the proclama-
ton line from Mexican OF Spanish leaders.
What could not be effected by force of arms
has been attempted by proclamations. con-
fessedly as futile as the Pope's alleged Bull
against the Comet. Among many others,
there was LINcoLN's celebrated proclama-
tion of January /, 1868, emancipating all
the slaves where he had no power to eman-
cipate, and leaving those in slavery whom
he had the power to set free. Appended to
his annual message of Dec. s, 1868, was an
sother proclamation-an Amnesty edict,
which, being recent, is familiar to our read
/, ers. But the other day, Mr.. LINcoLNissued
supplement to this proclamation Of Dec.
s. which was duly telegraphed and publish
ed in the newspapers. We notice that the
Lincolnite editors have been rather shy of
saying much about this supplemental proc
b.lamation. Il Is a confession on the part of
aOld ABE.r that he committed an egregious
blunder In his Amnesty decree which he
seeks to rectify by this subsequent ukase.
But for the present we will let one Of his
own Radical organs deal with him on this
topic. str-
- The st. Louis Democrat, the great gun Of
the Administration party in Missouri, says,
cin its issue of the 20th ult- that it is diff
.gcult to conceive that the President was in
earnest in issuing his recent supplement to
his Amnesty proclamation. at looks very
much like practical joke, notwithstanding
the formal manner of its introduction"
The Democrat may well say this for all
christendom knows how inveterate is
aUncle Abraham's" habit OF joking. But
the Democrat proceeds:
g The President gravely informs us that his
original proclamation of amnesty
Does not apply to the cases Of persons
who, at the time, when they seek to obtain
the benefits thereof by taking the oath
thereby prescribed, are in military, naval
or civil confinement or custody, or under
bonds or ON parole Of the civil, military or
naval NNitt0A ittCo VI ueCHto VI tuC OHlbCu
States as prisoners or persons detained for
offences Of any kind, either before or after
conviction, and that on the contrary, it does
apply to those persons who, being yet at
large and free from any arrest confinement
sor duress, shall voluntarily come forward
and take the said oath with the purpose of
restoring peace and establishing the ma
tional authority
In other words, the President tells us
hn...
: TO be punished, while all such as have not
been caught are to be pardoned. We con-
fess that we do not see the principle of the
distinction. This modification
erobs the Presidents amnesty plan of its
equality and consistency, which were quali-
ties it originally possessed, however defec-
tive In other respects. Ii looks like an at
tempt tosplit the edifference-tOc compromise
BY doing halfright halfwrong-a policy
which has run through very large proper
ton Of the Presidents acts.
The Democrat confesses in most upbraid-
ing terms its great disappointment in this
supplemental proclamation. Itavers that a
modification Of the original Amnesty edict
had been promised for long time, and now
when It has come, lit leaves al defects of
real magnitude uncorrected, and goes to a
matter Of exceedingly little practical con-
sequence The Democrat continues its crit
icism, and says Of the amendatory supple
ment: -N l-8
II merely changes the mode In which
rebels now under arrest shall be pardoned.
Instead Of claiming exemption under the
original proclamation, they will now have
oapply to the President personally In each
case, as he Is clever enough to inform them