justice. From him posterity will learn that an army of heroes, otherwise called an "Army of traitors," lived confronted and dared to die for a dream! Lord Kames, in his Elements of Criticism, observes that to draw a character is the master-stroke of description. In this Tacitus above all authors excels, and for this reason he is more readily and easily understood, than almost any historian of ancient times. Unfortunately, Mr. Swinton seems not to have appreciated the importance of presenting living portraits of the prominent men whose actions he so freely discusses, and which he so forcibly throws before the mind of his readers. The fault being one of omission rather than commission, is, however, venial.. He gives us the character of leading men only by implication, when a full description with such judicious comments as he would make, would pass for a final judgment. We deplore the omission! To his short description of Stonewall Jackson alone, we must look for comment upon the Confederate Generals. In describing the action of Chancellorsville he says: Fifty pieces of artillery vomiting their missiles athwart the night sky poured swift destruction into the Confederate ranks. Thus the torrent was stemmed. But more than all, an unseen hand had struck the head and front of all this hos. tile menace. Jackson had received a mortal hurt! "Thus died Stonewall Jackson, the ablest of Lee's lieutenants. Jackson was essentially an executive officer, and in this sphere he was incomparable. Devoid of high mental parts, and destitute of that power of planning and combina tion, and of that calm, broad military intellect which distinguished Gen. Lee, whom he regarded with a child-like reverence, and whose designs he loved to carry out, he had yet those elements of character that above all else inspire troops. A fanatic in religion, fully believing he was destined by Heaven to beat his enemy wherever he encountered him, he infused something of his own fervent faith into his men, and at the time of his death had trained a corps whose attacks in column were unique and irresistible: and it was noticed that Lee ventured upon no strokes of audacity after Jackson had passed away.' Our author, however, designed to describe not men but war, and he has done it to the life. Describing the "famous charge of Pickett's Division at Gettysburg, we are forcibly reminded of the beautiful lines of Ossian : "As roll a thousand waves to the rocks, so Swaran's host came on. Both descriptions, clothed in beautiful language, show the advancing-compressed-and now receding lines-now moving onward in the consciousness of strength-for a moment hesitating and then broken, shattered and destroyed. As the waves upon the rock they recoil, struggle and die. The closing scene of the drama-the surrender of Gen. Lee and his brave veterans, we extract from Mr. Swinton's pages. He says: "In the course of the afternoon the result of this momentous interview [the surrender] became known to both armies, and then all the intense, yet strangely diverse emotions which the intelligence was calculated to evoke, broke out in manifestations that pass all words of description. On the Union side there was joy unmixed and unrestrained, the joy of men that had gone through great tribulation, the joy of an army that, often unfortunate and ever appreciated, saw at length unparalleled labors crowned by the illustrious success. On the Confederate side there was a kind of joy too-such sad joy as men feel when a long agony is over. Yet there could not fail to be deep anguish in their hearts; and this burst forth when Gen. Lee rode through the ranks. Whole lines of battle rushed up to their beloved old chief, and choking with emotion, struggled with each other to wring him once more by the hand. Men who had fought throughout the war, and knew what the agony and humiliation of that moment must be to him, strove with a refinement of unselfishness and tenderness which he alone could fully appreciate to lighten his burden and mitigate his pain. With tears pouring down both cheeks, Gen. Lee at length commanded voice enough to say, 'Men, we have fought through the war together. I have done the best that I could for you.' Not an eye that looked on that scene was dry." In closing the book, we feel that the writer has faithfully executed his task; and although an invidious and unworthy vanity might have led us, by close and critical scrutiny, to the detection of errors and inaccuracies, we do not feel that it is our province to do this. ART. VIII. USURPERS AND TYRANTS-ORIGIN OF GOVERNMENT. IT is strange that so-called philosophers should be continually indulging in a priori speculations as to the origin and character of government, whilst all history is replete, almost to the exclusion of other matter, with accounts of the beginnings of new forms of political governments, and governments on a small scale originate daily within the sphere of every one's observation. They are all identically alike, in origin and in character-all begin in usurpation, and all are continued by force. Never did a government, paternal, patriarchal, monarchical, aristocratic, Republican, or Democratic, begin otherwise, and never was one otherwise continued. Indeed, human imagination can conceive and human ingenuity can devise no other mode for their inception or continuance. Usurpers who have beheaded or expelled weak, imbecile and effete dynasties, and instituted new forms of government, or modified old ones, and tyrants who have, by rigid rule and inexorable force, sustained and continued such usurped power, have justly been considered the greatest of mankind. Such were the Cæsars in Rome, the Capets in France, and the Plantagenets and Tudors in England. The Plantagenets and Tudors were almost half of them usurpers, and most of them tyrants. Those who were not tyrants were too amiable for rule, unpopular with their subjects, and, like the Stuarts of England and Louis XVI. of France, invited and begat revolution and usurpation by their very virtues-virtues that would have adorned private life, but which disqualified them for imperial dominion. But it is not only in Rome, France, and England that we find government beginning with usurpation. Every dynasty in Europe, nay, in the world, began with usurpation, more or less obvious and flagrant. We see the parental family government, the types and probably the first of all government, beginning every day, not by consent, compact, or contract, but in all cases by usurpation. Parents never ask their children whether they shall govern them or not. They assume or usurp government over them, and continue to govern them, not by persuading or reasoning with them, but by arbitrary force, formerly by occasional salutary applications of the rod, now by locking them up, making them study and recite a chapter or so from the Bible, putting them to bed in the daytime, or denying them their meals. Still, in the family, all rule begins by usurpation, and is continued by physical force. To persuade children, servants, or other subordinates to perform one's requirements, undermines authority, destroys respect, fear and prestige, and invites disobedience and insubordination. To give reasons for our commands to inferiors is the extreme of folly, for we thus encourage dissent and provoke argument, and should the inferior be a more ingenious reasoner than ourselves, he might overcome us in argument, and to be consistent we should have to withdraw our commands, however, proper, because, having appealed to the forum of logic, and the decision being against us, we should abide by that decision. To permit subordinates to reason with us, is to bring in question the infallibility of our own judgments, and, infallibility gone, the whole structure of human government falls to the ground. It all consists in "the right divine to govern wrong," the chances being, however, that in nine cases out of ten, those in power will govern rightly. Children, servants, slaves, subjects and all other inferiors, should obey their superiors, without questioning the propriety of their requirements, until tyranny becomes intolerable. Then rebellion or revolution become duties. We may rebel against superiors, but they should never permit us to argue and dispute with them. Ask any sea-captain or army officer if we are not right. The right of private judgment may be very innocently, if not very profitably, employed in building up and governing Utopias in the closet, but cannot safely be exercised in the practical walks of life, for it begets anarchy. "Obey the powers that be," usurpative or not, is the dictate of universal experience, of nature and of God. All established government is of divine right, and the doctrine is so admirably expressed and expounded by the Apostles that we quote from them: "Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's ;" Let every soul be subject to the higher powers: for there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God; whoever, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." "Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, and to obey magistrates." "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake; whether it be the King as supreme; or unto governors as unto 99 66 them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil-doers; and the praise of them that do well." Not a word is to be found in the Scriptures about social contracts, free Governments and consent Governments. Such paradoxical absurdities are modern inventions of silly charlatans and of ignorant demagogues. In looking to political Governments in Europe, it is obvious enough that their Governments began with usurpation, and are continued by force. This fact, though not so obvious, is equally true of our Republican institutions, State and Federal. They, in their present forms, originated in the revolution that threw off from us the dominion of England. That revolution was a series of usurpations of power, from beginning to end-as are all revolutions. It was originated by a few master-spirits, and carried on and controlled by them. The people but acquiesced, submitted and obeyed. Republics, like monarchies, begin with usurpation; but whilst monarchies are only initiated by usurpation, and carried on afterwards` without it, elective republics and democracies can only be sustained and carried by a continually recurring series of usurpations; for every election, from that of a constable up to that of a President, is preceded by acts of usurpation, by public meetings, nominating conventions, caucuses, &c. These bodies assume or usurp power, control parties, and thus keep alive and control Governments, although not recognized by the law or constitution as a part of the Government, or as having any power whatever. Nominating bodies are themselves gotten up and controlled by the grossest usurpation. A few self-constituted political leaders get up a meeting at a cross-road, or a court-house. Some one usurps the power to call some one to the chair, and the Chairman, on motion of some one, appoints a committee to make nominations. These nominations made, and the party considers itself in that county, state, or district, bound to sustain the nominees. Thus, by daily and continued usurpations of power, are our Governments, State and Federal, kept a-going, and thus only can they be sustained, renewed, and kept in action. The consent of the people is not given, nor even asked. They quietly submit to and endorse the nominations, or even where they protest against them, are forced to obey the nominees after their election. No new Congress, convention, or public meeting whatever can go into operation or be organized for action, except by an act of usurpation on the part of some one who undertakes to call the meeting to order, and to call some one to the chair. Of necessity, therefore, all government begins by usurpation. Even military usurpers usually get some friend or friends to take the initiative for them; but they are none the less usurpers. The machinery by which civilians virtually usurp power is less apparent, and is not accompanied by force; yet they too are self-appointed and self-elected, for by means of their friends they set the machinery in motion that attains the desired result. "Modesty is a quality that highly adorns a woman," but is a sad incumbrance to a man. In fact, it is only self-elected men that are fitted for rule. He who has not confidence in himself never deserves the confidence of others. Timid rulers are the worst of rulers. The courage that usurps power generally sustains a man in wielding it with confidence, calm deliberation and ability. Military usurpers have ever made the wisest and greatest sovereigns, because they possessed most physical and moral courage, had most confidence in themselves, and thereby commanded the confidence, respect and obedience of others. ART. IX.-NATIONAL DEBT A NATIONAL BLESSING. ALL debt, private, corporate or national, is a blessing, for debt is the great and only motive power of civilized society, that begets all wealth, prosperity and enlightenment, and advances human progress. This proposition is easily comprehended and explained, but, that National Debt alone is a blessing," can never be comprehended or explained, for the proposition is false. 'Tis true, debt like steam may be applied excessively, and beget explosions; yet society, as now organized, would be as erect and motionless without debt as a steamboat without steam. The creditor and debtor classes of society are the property holders and the non-property holders. All capitalists are property holders, and that being a scientific and generic term, we shall hereafter employ it instead of "property holders." Capital is power, the only power almost that keeps society at work in the absence of domestic servitude. But it is a far more all-pervading and efficient power than that defunct institution. We whites of the South own all the capital of the South, and shall continue to own it, for the negro is not a money-making animal. We are the creditor class, the negroes the debtor class. When they ceased to be slaves, they at once became debtors. Debtors without property; yet not bankrupts or insolvents. Their debts cling to them like the shirt of Nessus. To live, they must labor for some capitalist, and no capitalist will employ_them in any capacity, without sharing the profits of their labor. Every stroke of work by the negro goes in part to pay the endless debt which liberty imposes on him. Well it is for society that such is the case. Is not debt in this form a blessing? The abolition of the relation of master and slave begets the relation of debtor and creditor. We must quietly and cheerfully accept and submit to the change, and make the most of it. Debt, all must see, is a far more efficient motive power than slavery; and hence those societies are most industrious, wealthy and progressive, where there are abundance of paupers to work, and abundance of capitalists to keep them at work. All the world says, too, that capital or debt is a far more humane motive power than slavery, although it compels men to work harder, and taxes their labor more, for the benefit of the creditor or capitalist class; who consequently grow rich much faster than masters, and have fewer cares, troubles and responsibili |