the foregoing, we discover that our allegiance is an equal obligation to the Constitution, not to an official, resting on all American citizens. If an Administration severs its allegiance from the Constitution, or from its letter and spirit, the people become naturally and constitutionally absolved from its support, for our first allegiance is to the organic law, and secondly, to the Administration, only inasmuch as it faithfully and fully discharges its functions according to the letter and spirit of the Constitution; otherwise the people would plot with the Administration to subvert and overthrow the fundamental law of the land, which would sink us all again in chaos, as we were before its formation. In this instrument we see the power of the people to create official servantshirelings to do a deputized act, according to its letter and spirit, which they would find impossible to discharge, from the extent of territory and the inconvenience it would subject the masses to. Hence, for officials to assume to do more than discharge the oath of their official stations, would imply fools or knaves. This every "Constitutional man" knows to be no more nor less than the truth.

Daniel Webster, while in Congress, and at a period when free discussion of the acts of the Administration was sought to be restrained, offered the following, in defense of the freedom of speech:

"Important as I deem it to discuss, on all proper occasions, the policy of the measures at present pursued, it is still more important to maintain the right of such discussion in its full and just extent. Sentiments lately sprung up, and now growing popular,

render it necessary to be explicit on this point. It is the ancient and constitutional right of this people to canvass public measures and the merits of public men. It is a home-bred right, a fireside privilege. It has been enjoyed in every house, cottage and cabin in the nation. It is not to be drawn into controversy. It is as undoubted as the right of breathing the air, and walking the earth. Belonging to private life as a right, it belongs to public life as a duty; and it is the last duty of those whose representative I am shall find me to abandon. This high constitutional privilege I shall defend and exercise within this House, and in all places-in time of war, in time of peace, and at all times. Living, I will assert it; dying, I will assert it; and should I leave no other legacy to my children, by the blessing of God I will leave them the inheritance of free principles, and the example of a manly, independent, and constitutional defence of them."

The sentiments herein expressed by the Hon. late Daniel Webster should have a cordial fellowship with every American, and will have with those who adhere to the letter and spirit of the Constitution; for less would be unmanly and unconstitutional. Hence, we may know the party by the effects which they produce, as a tree by its fruit.

At the present juncture of our national troubles, the Catholic clergy in the United States are very careful in their expressions, and seem to feel to take no part further than their duties as Constitutional men, may require of them. They are far from being Abolitionists or Emancipationists; for the bitter fruit

of such doctrines the intelligent ones are conversant with, in the West Indies, Mexico, Central and South America, where the representatives of these incendiary elements in society have produced the most desolating and devastating consequences. With reference to this matter, an article from Archbishop Hughes' organ is as follows:

[From the Metropolitan Record-Archbishop Hughes' Organ.] THE PRESIDENT'S PROCLAMATION—AN EMANCIPATION CRUSADE TO BE INAUGURATED.

"In another part of this week's Record will be found what we think our readers will regard as a startling and extraordinary pronunciamento from the President of the United States. We say that it is both startling and extraordinary, and a perusal of the document itself will afford sufficient proof of the correctness of our opinion in regard to its character.

This production commences with the statement that "the war is to be prosecuted hereafter, as heretofore, for the object of practically restoring the constitutional relations between the United States and the people thereof in which States that relation may be, or is, suspended and disturbed.' This is a sound principle, and no patriot can take exception to its enforcement within the limits of the Constitution. But it should not be forgotten that the South is not the only portion of the country by which that Constitution has been violated and set at defiance, for its most cherished guarantees have been regarded as so much waste paper in many of the loyal States, whose fidelity to the Union could not be called in question. We do not care for pursuing this painful feature in

our civil war any further. We only call attention to it for the simple reason that it was suggested by the opening sentence of this remarkable production of the Presidential pen.

The second paragraph of the proclamation states "that on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State, or any designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be thenceforward and forever free." As we publish the document in full, it is unnecessary to make any further quotations therefrom, particularly as the extract we have made may be said to contain the pith and substance of the whole affair.

Never, since the nation started into existence, has it been called upon to give its attention to a matter of such great moment and importance as that presented in President Lincoln's last state paper. It is no wonder, therefore, that its publication should have produced such a profound sensation all over the country, and that its probable effects upon the future of the Republic should be canvassed and discussed with such intense anxiety. It is so strangely at variance with the conservative views hitherto expressed by the Chief Magistrate, that it has fallen upon the public ear with stunning effect. While it has delighted the radical portions of the North, it has produced a feeling of dismay and bewilderment among the conservative and patriotic masses.

Should the policy foreshadowed in this document be carried out, at the time specified therein, we may

reasonably expect the enactment of a tragedy on American soil, compared with which the bloody horrors of the St. Domingo massacre were mere child's play. The slave population of all the Southern States is, we believe, according to the last census, about four millions, while of the States in rebellion the slave population is about four-fifths of the whole. Now, in the event alluded to-that is, the continuance of the Southern Confederacy in its present attitude, and its subjugation by the Union army-all these will be emancipated. We will suppose such a condition to be realized, what is to become of the millions thus suddenly manumitted? Where are they to go? Are they to be placed in possession of the forfeited estates of their former owners, and if so, how is the process of the division of property to be carried out?

Let us again ask, what are we to do with the millions of whites who either owned or were dependent upon slave property for the means of subsistence? These are problems which we think will be rather difficult of solution by our greatest statesmen-that is, if the race of American statesmen has not already run out. If we pursue this matter still further, we shall find ourselves involved in greater and more serious difficulties at every step. Let us give it the serious consideration to which it is entitled by its influence on the future condition of the Republie by its terrific importance.

The proclamation is only to be carried into effect in the event of the disloyal States persisting in their present attitude of hostility towards the Government after the first of January next. It will hardly be sup