Year: 1863

Editor Intelkgencer There dom
you see, Mr.. Editor, that Pm in town,
after all the hootings of your amiable
and yet sharp correspondents, "Win,
field" and many others of like proclvi
tics? One gave me a blow here, and
another a thrust there, and another
made up faces at my espoused doctrine
Of the anarclIical status and territorial
attitude of the revolted States, and
that every slave in that territory had
become free man in the eye of our
great Constitution. But how does
the case stand now? Why, only see
The Supreme Court of the United
States has arrived at the sage conclu-
sion,-Jndgc Taney, of Dred Scott
celebrity, with the rest-that the re-
volted States have lost their rights as
States, and must come into the Union
simply as Territories subject to the
United States Government, and emit
tied to its protection What is this,
other than the self same position es-
tablished by tie deductions Of my own
investigation of that question in your
paper last year? the series commen-
ccd in July or August, 1861, and end
ing some time last Spring year?


Now, do not say or pretend to
maintain that | have given impulse
to the President, (for he recognized
the doctrine or the Supreme Court
Of these mighty realms, in this re-
spect, or that | alone originated the
theory. But this say, and | think
that you will concur in it, that, when
l announced it, all the world seemed
to be strangers to it, and many hooted
it.


Well, what of that? what does it
amount to, any way? Why, just moth
ing, more nor less, than that have
seen the same thing that some other,
and great men too, have seen. Who
saw it first | have no means of know
ing nor because | saw it, even if !
were the first, am so vain as to sup
pose that others saw it because did !;
and | know that their seeing it first, if
il was even so, was no cause why
saw it, 1t was original with me, and
very probably it was so with them
also.


But this one thing, Mr.. Editor, you
and both know alike which is, that,
neither Of us ever saw the subject
broachcd by any one, till it was
brought out in the investigations of
your humble servant, Peter Perdy"
If the matter is original with Judge
Nelson of the Supreme Court, and is
indorsed by all the rest of the bench,
| certainly have good cause to be
cheerful, and rejoice that find myself
in tolerably fair company, at least.


But what is to be done with that fair
territory desolated hy our arms and
coniscated by the authorities of war !?
is grave question, and one which
should wake up an inquiring interest
in every patriots breast. What is to
be done with it ? Sure enough Who
can tell? As have already informed
you, the Hon. Isaac n. Arnold made
a great and telling speech on yester-
day, at Magnolia, and he took the
ground that We must and wonld con
fiscate all the rebel lands and give
them to- the soldiers who have fought
so braveiy in crushing the rebellion
and bringing that territory back into
the possession Of the Government.
Introduce new social element
said he into those countries settle
them with a people who know how to
estimate the blessings of liberty
and who take delight in improving
and refining human society instead OF
debasing it give TO these countries
population who shall venerate the
image of God instead of defacingit OF
changing it to the image of hell
What sublime thought /! To change
SO extensive a territory, overspread
with the institutions of the verest
despotism, and where the most brutal
and savage cruelties constantly trans
pire, and where the basest and mos,
sickening forms of moral corruption
are notorious, shocking the ordinary
sensibilities Of tue human soul, into
q blooming moral expanse where righ
rule and the love Of the human wea
triumph and bear sway, is indeed ;
most cheering thought.


The hand of God is surely in this


Man, moral agent, cannot be coerced
strictly speaking. No man proves to,
strong for Omnipotence. In orde
therefore to bring great and glorious
events, touching the destinies of man
the Divine Being is under the shee


necessity of moving in circuitou


way to act in consistency with man


moral freedom and yet to achicy


great events in direct opposition t


the attitude which man has volunts
, rily assumed. Than that