was a war more shabbily conducted than that was for a long time. Mr. Madison's administration had not comprehended the great exigencies of the case. The Capitol was actually seized by British troops. Our towns were burned and our flag disgraced by the enemy, and we were scarcely less disgraced by the conduct of the war in various quarters. The Federalists opposed themselves to that war, but with not a thousandth part of the wickedness of those who oppose the war to crush this rebellion; and yet they were swept away, and not a single vestige of that once proud party left remaining. If it be material to ascertain why this was so, the solution will be found in the fact that they were opponents of the country and the gov ernment in a great crisis in their existence. The Tories of the Revolution had a vivid experience of a similar kind. Execration will forever follow them. The Tories of to-day can plainly read their doom in the story of the Tories of the Revolution, and in that of the Federalists of 1812. But it is of greater importance for us who desire to sustain the country, to know how we can meet the great exigencies of the occasion. We cannot acquit ourselves by half-way measures-by half supporting and half opposing; a kind of mermaid support, half woman and half fish. It must be whole-souled, and go to the whole extent. If it is intended to put this rebellion down, it must be taken strong hold of, and it is the duty and the high privilege of the American people to put it down, and put it down forever. "Treat with it and make liberal propositions of peace." These have become the catch-words of the day-"I am in favor of prosecuting the war and of maintaining the Union, but I would at the same time make the most liberal propositions of peace."

Now let us see. Suppose there was a riot in Cortland, and a hundred men were engaged in the destruction of property. You call the magistracy together. They all come out and attempt to quell the riot, but their force is inadequate, and they call out the military power. But the magistracy instruct them: "Go and put down the riot. It is in arms against us. It is threatening life and property and carrying on destruction. Put it down; but at the same time make it the most liberal offers of peace." You send an officer to arrest a murderer. His hands are red with blood, but you tell the officer: "We are

opposed to murderers ;-go and arrest him, but make him the most liberal propositions of peace." That is the argument of it. I wonder if they suppose they can hold a position on such a niche as that? Yes; liberal offers of peace, to an army in the field, of hundreds of thousands of men, in sight of the Capitol, with their guns levelled upon it; destroying life and property, and committing every crime, political and moral, that can be found in the catalogue of depravity. I might possibly consent to drop some of their leaders a line, but there would be a noose at the end of it. I am for just such propositions of peace as have been made to them at Hatteras by Butler and Stringham. Sringham is a very good name. I am quite willing it should be Stringthem. That is the only proposition that they can understand or appreciate, and the only proposition that can or ought to be made.

We must go with a great deal more leniency, because they are our "brothers!" But are they for that reason authorized to murder us and destroy the common citadel of the family household? No! meet them at once. It is much easier to defend the door-sill than the hearth-stone. It is better to fight the battle at the porch than at the altar. Settle the question there, and let it be disposed of there. Those men mean disunion and nothing else. They have meant it for a great number of years. They care no more now about the questions that have divided parties in regard to slavery than I care for nudity in the Fejee Islands. They are determined, and had rather reign. in hell than serve in heaven. If they could not govern the whole country, they meant to govern part, we are told, and have forced us to try the question of national existence by the terrible arbitrament of the sword. And yet when they are engaged in this causeless rebellion, to treat them with great leniency, and go with the most liberal propositions of peace! An old Revolutionary soldier, who was accustomed to walk with an espontoon, which he had carried in the war-a long staff with a sharp instrument, like a knife, at one end-was assailed one day by a ferocious dog, and bitten. Failing to drive the dog away, he turned the sharp end of the weapon and run him through. The owner of the dog cried out angrily, "What made you kill my dog?" "Because," said the soldier, "he bit me and threatened my life." "Why did you not keep him off with the

other end of your weapon?" "I should," said the soldier, "if the dog had come with the other end at me."

Now, if they had only come to us with liberal propositions of peace, we could have gone to them in the same way; but when they come with fire and sword and war and threatening, there is no other way to meet them but with corresponding weapons and in a manner to ensure their overthrow. We must either conquer or they must. It is a question between government, on the one hand, and treason and rebellion on the other; and you may weigh it out as many times as you will; you may pretend to erect political parties on it; but after generations and the judgment of Heaven will hold him responsible who undertakes to aid this rebellion in any shape or manner. "They are entitled to consideration!" Why? If they had staid in Congress they would, with the conservatives of the North, have held the majority, and of course the power of the legislative department; but they meant to avail themselves of the election of an opposition President as a pretence to dissolve this government, and erect a military monarchy; for that is what they would have in their despotism; and that is the very question we have to deal with. Mark their whole course. Trace it from the springing of this upas tree that has diffused its malaria far and near, North and South. Examine it in all its parts; and you will find there is nothing in or about it, but what breathes contagion, and is rank with death and destruction. Woe be to the politician who undertakes to jeopard the existence of the government by paltering in a double sense with this great question! It is not a question between the North and South. It is one between government and rebellion.

There is no people more loyal than a large majority of those of the Southern States themselves, when you take the revolver from their ears and the bowie knife from their throats. Has Virginia yielded ?-poor old State-a portion of her people have been bullied, dragooned, and defrauded into secession, and no sooner is that done than she rises like the Phoenix from her ashes, and reorganizes a government faithful to the Union. Did they yield in Missouri? No. General Fremont has been under the necessity of proclaiming martial law to protect the citizens from pillage and destruction. In Kentucky do they yield? No. Look at the mighty majority there of 60,000. There they met

secession in the face. Look at the speeches of Holt and Crittenden, and at the vote there, and see what you find. Go with me for a single moment to the State of Tennessee and take one act that is a specimen of the whole of this rebellion. We all remember Andrew Jackson and his glorious history, and the great services he performed for his country, and how he crushed this serpent of rebellion when it attempted to rear its hideous head in his day. In the early days of Andrew Jackson, and through all the agitations of his life, there was one found who never forsook him. One man, somewhat his junior in age, a lawyer like himself, who went with him to fight the Indians on the borders; who was with him at New Orleans, and accompanied him in subduing the Spanish in Florida; who was with him through all trails, and went by his side with a friendship like the friendship of David and Jonathan. That man passed on through all these conflicts, and being found honest, capable, aud faithful, was placed on the Supreme Bench of the State of Tennessee. From there he was finally transferred to the Bench of the Supreme Court of the United States. In the mean time he had grown to be aged;-twenty years more of frost had silvered his head than has silvered mine, yet he remained in his exalted position as one of the justices of the highest tribunal of the American Union. Holding his circuit according to the Constitution and laws in the State of Missouri, it became his duty to charge the grand jury on the subject and crime of treason; and he did charge them, as any lawyer will say, and as required by his oath, truly. When he returned to his native Tennessee, where he had lived his long and honorable life; where he had buried Andrew Jackson; where he had discharged the various duties of soldier, officer, lawyer, and judge, and where he found his aged partner on a sick-bed, almost gasping out her last life-breath, he was warned to resign his office or leave the State. The old man of upwards of 80 years, and who was bound there to his State, to his home, by so many recollections, rather than yield his life to brutal violence, was forced to fly to some city of refuge where he might find safety. That man was John Catron, of the United States Supreme Court. And these

are the men that our peace politicians desire to have treated with "liberal propositions of peace!" Are they alone to blame? No! Those who write, and print, and circulate sentiments in VOL. II.-5

sympathy with them, and hold conventions and peace meetings, and practice treason under that name, are as responsible as they. I condemn them all together; and the judgment of Heaven will condemn them all together; and the indignant people will cry out against them together, for they are all the same in kind.

My friend tells me there is something to be said about taxes. Taxes are at all times burdensome, but they are vastly more burdensome without a government than they are with one. In our present case it will be a great deal better to be taxed a half, or even to the full amount of all we possess, if we can maintain our ground, than to have the ploughshare of ruin driven over the whole, and destroy property and government together. I tell you, my fellow-citizens, as a man who has had some experience, and devoted himself somewhat to thought on these questions, that when once you let rebellion succeed in a popular government there is an end of the whole matter; and after that show me the most wealthy man in a community, and I will show you one who has the power of hand to get and keep by the law of main force. Let this rebellion succeed and you will have every other kind of rebellion down to that where, if a vagabond wants your horse, he will take it in spite of you, and there will be no law to help you. The rule will be that "he may take who has the power, and let him keep who can." Are the taxes going to be formidable? Certainly! Who is to blame? Those who have inaugurated the rebellion, or those who are trying to subdue it? I confess I thought we had come to a degenerate time; that there was little of true life or patriotism left in the country, and I do not, for myself, regret this war; it has taught me that there is a popular heart; for I see the people rise in their majesty and cast aside the miserable shackles of politics, and I would like to see a party, however strong, strong enough to hold me on such a question. It must not be made of secession leather, or I will rend it as Samson did the seven green withes. Who objects to taxes? An individual here and there who, not being well informed, thinks if he can have peace it will raise the price of butter. But he who complains of taxes, at such a time as this, is no friend of his country; and when you see a man cry out against the taxes to support such a war, you may believe that Judas Iscariot is