UNITED STATES.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume I, Issue 20, 14 November 1861, Page 5 (Supplement)

UNITED STATES.

THE jPEESIDENT’s MESSAGE.

The American President s IVlcssage—delivered on the sth July—does not convey the impression that a great man is struggling with a great national crisis. There is no symptom of skill, and but little vigour—except the'demand for 400,000 men, and 400,000,000 dollars, for “making this contest a short and decisive one.” The tone is not that of the head of a great State speaking of and to rebels, which would be no error if the i-j i. . j!. A . , x ILSIUUIU ulu ni)|. «ii- same tllnt? rirOurSfi lO emil* press those rebels by fire and sword. Both in narrative and in argument, the President speaks like a man debating an open question, with other men standing on equal ground ; and the announcement that he is going to strengthen his argument by the march of one of the greatest armies the world ever saw, and by the expenditure of a greater number of dollars than the w orld probably contains, occurs in the middle of the prelection with an abruptness and by-the byness which, if not absolutely ludicrous, certainly does not rise to the height of tho theme. These are not mere matters

of taste—they are indications, or half-conscious expressions, of certain important facts, and especially the fact that even the Government at Washington does not yet, as is certainly did not at the beginning, feel that the procedure of the Southern States—violating as it does all principles of fair dealing, at variance as it ts, according to European notions, with any theory on which a State could be constituted or anarchy avoided, is j’et, according to not only the American constitution, but American ideas, distinguishable in some undefined degree from an ordinary rebellion. A large portion of the Message is occupied bj a narrative of all that has been said and done in the last four mouths—which reads very like a newspaper report, in tone much the same, and in composition not so good. The facts may be fairly stated; but it is not easy to see either the utility or the becomingness of having them detailed over again by the Chief Magistrate, with comments in the spirit not of a Chief Magistrate but of a dull and ineffective party writer. For instance, it is surely to no good purpose that the President of the United States, in a great State document, should elaborately sneer at some local politicians as having been elected by the “ Unionists,” and having voted with the “ Disnnionists”. Even in the narrative, wo have additional confession of what constitutes the real weakness of President Lincoln’s case. He takes credit for the central Government having, even after war or at least Secession was formally declared, dealt with the Secessionists not as being rebels, but as being in a better position than lawful belligerents. The Government, it seems (and this is the only revelation in the President’s narrative), politely and solemnly assured the South-Carolinian insurgents that no harm would be done them if they would only permit some bread to be sent to the garrison in Fort Sumter—a courtesy which the insurgents acknowledged by an immediate bombardment. Further, it seems that the insurgents were assured that the Government were willing to refer the whole matter between them “to time, discussion, and the ballot-box for final adjustment”. Insurrections so dealt with at the beginning are sure to require a great many men and a great many dollars to deal with them in the end. Then the President enters on a long and good argument to the effect that Secession is unlawful, both according to reason and according to the constitution. Even as a mere argument, the President here makes what is pretty nearly a fatal admission He states that, “ with rebellion, sugar-coated, they [the Secessionists] have been drugging the people of their section for more than thirty years”—which is just one way of expressing the fact that there has always been in the United States a party, and a party too having the majority for a whole generation up till Mr. Lincoln’s own election this year, which maintained that such a procedure as the Secession of a Slate by the vote of a majority within itself was permitted and contemplated by the constitution. The doctrine may be very wrong —judged according to reason it surely is; but it has been openly maintained by many men who have sat even in the Presidential chair, and it cannot be expected that it should be universally admitted to be rebellion to do what it was lawful to say. But, even though the argument were perfectly irrefragable, the facts would still remain. President Lincoln says that States cannot secede—but then nearly half of the States have seceded. A lawyer, we all know, very learnedly proved to a man in the stocks that it was impossible to put any person in that awkward position for the offence which had been charged, and yet so far failed to satisfy the person chiefly concerned, as to receive for reply “ But here I am.” The President tells South Carolina and the rest that the constitution renders it impossible they can go out, and they reply “But wo are out.” That is the real difficulty. The thing assuredly ought not to have been done, but it is done—and how it is to be undone F By 400 thousand men and 400 millions of dollars, says Mr. Lincoln. That is a terrible price, even were success certain. Mr. Lincoln says no —the tiling sought to be purchased is worth, ho calculates, “ ten- times the men and ten times tho mony.” Ten times 400,000 is 4,000,000, which is more than all than all the men in the northern State. What is the thing which is worth more than all these ? It is not the abolition of slavery —the Message is perhaps not more remarkable for anything than for avoiding even the slightest allusion pointing in that direction. Tim President with a reference to tho Wav of independence, says, “ Surely each man has as strong a motive now to preserve our liberties as each had then to establish them.” But it is in vain to speak as if the “ liberties ” of the Northern States were threatened. All that is threatened is the integrity of the Union, which is or may be much, but certainly threatens no man’s liberties. It is most natural that many Americans should fiercely deprecate tho retirement from the Union of some of its members ; but since these members will go, and have gone, is it either desirable or practicable forcibly to drag them back and hold them in ? In spite of, or perhaps a little in consequence of the President’s demand for men and money, it may be suspected that those questions are now receiving a graver cousidei ation than has hitherto been vouchsafed them, at least to appearance, and the more they are considered the more they will deter— Scotsman.