Year: 1865

W hCh OONSAhOA AlOluSu, 1IONlS-
Ional Governor of the United States
for the State of North Carolina, says
that he does not think Union men
will be punished" in that State,
what does s;:ch an extraordinary ex-
preston hean? When the Northern
allies of the late rebels declare that,
having laid down their arms, every
State latel ly in rebellion has as good
a right to send representatives to
Congress without condition or in
quiry as the loyal States-what do
they mean? What does the total
absence in the rebel States of any
disposition but that of sullen acqui-
escence signify?


All such things mean simply that
the great struggle has merely chang
ed its form, not its essence 1t is a
contest between the spirit of equal
rights and of privilege. The form
is a struggle between Nationality
and State Sovereignty; and this con-
test is not yet settled. The people
of the United States have to meet
this year exactly the same spirit that
they met last year. They have to
fight it now as earnestly as they
fought it then. The field only, not
the fight, has changed.


Meanwhile we are glad to record
the great advantages which the peo-
pie and truly popular government
have gained over the enemy. In a
struggle width is in its very nature
long and iuctuating it is cheering to
have reached a point of such positive
progress as we have now attained.
All we ask is that in our exultation
we do not recede: that we do not
misconceiVe the real nature of our
advantage and fatally assume it to
be final victory.


The doctrine of State Sovereignty,
which would be the present ruin OF
the United States, of civil liberty,
and of civilization, has been for thir-
ty years and more aiming TO engross
the Government. 1t has had more
able and resolute leaders and a more
stupid and superstitious following
than any other policy in our history
The ingenuity and persistence with
which this dogma ofState Sovereign
ty attacked and sought to destroy
the fundamental principles of the
National Government give our po-
litical history its profoundest inter
est. This dogma was pure reaction.
1t was the protest of aristocracy and
the Middle Ages against democracy
and a new era. And the struggle
was so skillfully conducted that at
length the peaceable overthrow of
the Union seemed to be foregone
conclusion.


The State Sovereignty leaders,
making the discussion of slavery
their excuse, felt themselves strong
enough in 1860 to force conclusion.
They were sure they could do one of
two things. They could either ter
rify the demoralized country into
submission to their terms-or by
Withdrawing from the Union they
could compel reconstruction upon
their own conditions. By all appar-
ent logic they were right The con-
dition of the country seemed to jus
tify their conclusion. The doom of
the Union was sealed in the estima-
ton OF the shrewdest observers.


But great criminals never allow
tor moral causes. Accustomed to
believe men to be governed by the
basest selfshness, they found all
their calculations upon meanness and
cowardice and habit, forgetting those
extraordinary impulses which are to
nations what the inspirations of NOR
tai peril are to individuals. Count
ing only upon the tame servilIty of a
controlling majority of the country
as it had been revealed in the con-
duct of such men as Isaac Toucey,
James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce,
William B. Reed, Vallandigham, and
the Woods, with the party Of which
they were leaders, and upon the tone
of the press of the same party-re-
lying further and confidently upon
the position taken by the New York
Tribune, the recognized organ of the
radical section Of the Republican