Year: 1862

eral Government ana OppOsttoh 10 H.


justified by a Portland Paper.


A few DAYS since we took occasion TO pass
briefly in review an article in the Advertiser
from the pen ofits new editor, Hon. F. o. j.
Smith, entitled "God and the White Man, and
the Negro Race If there was any point more
distinctly exhibited in the article under re-
view than any other, it seemed to our mind to
be this,-that, as in the caption to the article
"God and the White Man are arrayed in oppo
sition and antagonism to, and in conflict with
the "Negro Race" If such were the case
Afric's sable sons might well lift up their dus-
ky hands in utter despair, and exclaim, fear
full odds! unequal contest" The "White
Man" alone has proved terrible foe to the
quiet of Africa. and has pursued and hunted
the less favored black man with a merciless-
ness and ferocity that have seldom been
equalled by the wild beasts of the jungle; and
now if God is to be joined with the White Man
in fencing in and weighing down the poor
black. then indeed is his situation and destiny
hopeless one. We shall not stop to combat
the idea that the "White Man" is tine natural
antagonist of the negro,-though we by no
means admit the proposition-but before we
shall concede that God has become his ally in
in such contest, we must wait for better au-
thority and more convincing proofs than the
bare, unsupported assumptions of the editor of
the Portland Advertiser, albeit that editor and
the princely proprietor of "Forest Home" are
one and indivisible. At the present time, how
ever, our business is with another matter-a
matter of far more transcendent importance,
at the present juncture, to the American peo-
pie, than the simple question Of negro status
or negro emancipation. We have to deal now
with an open, defiant, unblushing declaration
ofhostility 10 the Federal Government ITSELF
and of open justification ofthose who renounce
and oppose it.


The article in the Advertiser TO which we
have referred above, closes with a promise to
resume the subject, and to exhibit and ex-
plain the difference between using aud abolish
ing slavery in the suppression of the rebellion.
In the Advertiser of Wednesday morning, that
promise is redeemed, and it is upon the doc
trnes and monstrous propositions of that sec
ond article that we propose to say brief
word. The article commences with the fol-
lowing sentence, with which we make no con-
troversy:


Slavery is fixed, legal Institution, in the
rebellous States; as much so, as the constitu-
tions of those States, or any vested corporate
right under those constitutions.


We fully agree with the writer that "in time
Of peace it would be a degree of madness and
folly to assert the right, in the Federal govern
ment to abolish slarery in any of the Stdtes;"
but we utterly deny and repudiate the idea
that


In time Of ,car no greater authroty is i'm
parted to the Federal Government than exists
for it, in time of peace, in respect to its power
over State rights and State institutions


The very first thing required of the Presi-
ident of the United States is to take an oath to
"preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution
of the United States" This is not an oath TO
observe the provisions of the Constitution in
his own official acts-not an oath TO support
the Constitution-though the duty is impera-
tive upon him to observe it according TO his
best Judgment; duty which he cannot
disregard without incurring the hazard
ofimpeachment; but the oath is to "preserce,
protect, and defend the Constitution !" to do
this against the attempts both of foreign invad-
ers to overturn it, and of domestic traitors and
rebels to subvert it. In time of peace-pro-
found domestic peace, as well as peace with
foreign powers - the Federal Government
could have neither excuse nor apology for
many things which, ia time of rebellion, it is
imperiously necessary to do to prevent the ut
for ovarfhroU of the Govarnmapt Tn t;,oa
of peace the Government cannot even quar-
ter asoldier in any house without the consent
of the owner; but In time of war no private
house can claim exemption from being turned
into either hospital or barrack, if the pub
lie exigencies require it. In time of peace
martial law could scarcely be proclaimed in
any city or State; but in time of war all civil
authority may be required to bend to the ter
rible necessities of the occasion. In time OF
peace no state Government can be interfered
with, and no officers acting under a State con-
sttution are TO be molested; but in time of
rebellion State governments, and State con-
sttutions, and State institutions and laws, may
all be suspended, and a temporary provisional
government established, as was done in Mis-
souri, for short season; as is now done over
portions of Tennessee, Louisiana, and North
Carolina; and the Portland Advertiser, under
the control of +. o. j. Smith, is the first paper
that we have yet seen on the North side of
Mason aud Dixon's line-if possibly we except
the New York Day Book, aud few of its
class, that have been excluded from the U. S.
mails or suppressed-that has denied this doc
trine, and virtually pronounced the exercise of
power by the Federal Government in the
States referred to, an usurpation and outrage.


But We have not time, at present, to pursue
this train of thought, nor do we deem it neces-
sary that we should do SO. We will only re-
mark upon this point, that the Federal Govern
ment being the natural guardian of the Con-
stitution, and that Constitution being designed
for perpetual observance, it follows to every
loyal mind, it seems TO us, that no matter what
rises up against that Instrument, and threat
ems its overthrow or subversion, whether il be
individuals or States, legislators or institu-
tions, il must be removed out of the way, tho
that removal involve the utter destruction of
the force thus arrayed against the Government.
And we say further, that, in the face of such a
doctrine as is laid down in the Advertiser--as
the events of the last eighteen months have
shown-the salvation of the Constitution and
Iii e.