conflict is over, to break in upon the absurd laws of nations. We must show their tendencies by their effects, their true character by their contrast to civil and common law, and thus bring them into contempt, abhorrence and eventual disuse. In doing this, however, we have a more formidable obstacle than the aristocracy, or the aspirant to office. This obstacle is found in the clergy-in those whose profession it is to teach religion and morality, the will of God, and the duties of man, and who are to a great extent accredited by the people in such teaching. Would that their influence in their appropriate work were far greater than it is. Yet have the clergy come out in this war as the bulwark of those absurd maxims in and by which this war exists. Such a statement relative to the clergy, I am aware, may shock many a pious mind; but, if we confine the statement to the clergy of the South, there would be a ready acquiscence. Davis and his coadjustors did not dare enter on their bloody work until they had secured from the leading clergy a pledge of their influence. Without censuring the clergy of the North for the aid they have given by their influence to enlistments, and it has been great, I must say, they have done much to revive the old despotic sentiment that there resides in civil government a certain mystic, divine life or power above and beyond that of the people who compose the State; a power capable of binding men's consciences in certain cases, or rather a certain delegated divine authority over men. By such inculcations much has been done by the clergy, even of the North, to convince the people, that civil government has by divine sanction a power over the liberties, and even the lives of the people, a divine authority of appealing to arms as "the highest trial of right." Thus the clergy, whose duty and profession it is to inculcate the word of God, are doing much to shield the ambitious warrior against the remonstrances of conscience, which no other class of men can do. Nor is this strange; for as the acts of war are a direct invasion upon the prerogatives of God, men cannot well be induced to perpetrate them without assurance of a special divine sanction. So it has ever been even in pagan lands, and in the most corrupt forms of Christianity. Heathen priests have taught that the smell of carnage was more grateful to their gods than sweet incense. The envy of Cain, which led to the first murder, was excited by religious rivalry; and it may be doubted whether any war, from his age downward, has been accomplished without the claim of religious .sanction. With these views, I am led to believe, that the only point we can press with hope of success, is the clerical, and that the friends of peace should now be preparing themselves for this work. What though they should find it necessary to array before the moral vision of the clergy all the innocent blood, with all its guilt and remorse, that has been shed from the days of righteous Abel to the last victim of this rebellion? If they are the true disciples of Christ, they will meekly receive the rebuke. I have no doubt, if the clergy and the church could be brought to right views of war, and the flagrant absurdities of international law, and to repudiate all that veneration for kings and governments which has no foundation in moral right, and none in Scripture, but had its origin in the unhallowed alliance of church and state, then all the difficulties, especially in our own land, from governmental sources in bringing the war-delusion to an end, would clear up apace. Middlebury, Vt. S. W. B. BATTLE OF BATON ROUGE, LA.-The field exhibited evidences of the desperation of the combatants at the crossing of the roads where the rebels had endeavored to flank us, and where they were met by the Indiana and Michigan Regiments. The men fought hard. Those who had lost their arms tore up the rails from the fences. More than one rebel was found dead who had been killed in this way. In one spot, behind a beautiful tomb, with effigies of infant children kneeling, twelve dead rebels was found in one heap. Everywhere they strewed the earth, and made ghastly the quiet grave-yard in which they lay SOULS OF SOLDIERS.-Who is responsible for them? Who will answer for them in the day of judgment? They fight our battles for us, and in our stead discharge the solemn duty of all legal citizens in defending the government. While we are secure and happy at home, they, as our representatives, are exposing health and comfort, their limbs and their lives, to the fatal hazards of war. We will gratefully recognize their good service in our behalf, and acknowledge our obligation to equip, maintain and reward them. But what Christian can reflect how much more than mere life every soldier imperils, and not feel the terrible stress of the inquiry, 'what is to become of these men's souls? Who must answer for them, if we let them go into battle and into eternity without the very best religious instruction ? Too many of them are manifestly unprepared to die, and if cut down as they are, would take their place forever with the ungodly and the blasphemer. If patriotism, justice and humanity command us to care well for their temporal good, a thousand-fold more do they oblige us to do all that can be done to save their souls endangered in our cause.-N. Y. Observer. These are very natural and pungent questions; but how is it possible to have war in any form without all the evils so pathetically deplored. Wh. not strike then at the root of the whole mischief by doing away its cause the custom of war? Albury, Sept. 23. SOUTHERN TREASON. Like Jezebel's face at her casement, Alas, for America's glory! Told as a dream of the night! And woe, for the shame and the pity, City should fight against city, And brother with brother contend! Alas, what a libel on Freedom! Patriots-gone to the bad, Slavedrivers-Liberty-mad! How sadly through sons so degraded, 'Mid the deep scorn of the world; Foul'd by black treason are furled! Southerner, shame on such treason! MARTIN F. TUPPER. PEACEMEN RESPECTED IN WAR.-It is remarkable that a settlement of Quakers near Mount Vernon have remained unmolested during the entire war, though alternately included within national and rebel lines. Their semi-weekly meetings have been regularly continued, sometimes a rebel picket pacing in front of the building, and perhaps a Union sentinel having the same beat the next week. They have remained undisturbed both in property and in person. BRITISH SYMPATHY WITH AMERICA. From an article in the July number of the American Quarterly Review, one of our ablest journals, edited chiefly by Professors in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary in New York, we quote an extract that very truthfully represents the view, taken by nearly all loyal men in this country, of Eng land's conduct towards us in this rebellion : "Up to this time the tone of the foreign, especially of the English press and periodicals, had been favorable to the United States government. The North was encouraged; the South was blamed. England had freed its colonial slaves, and boasted of its love and sacrifices for human freedom. For a quarter of a century, it had been assailing this country chiefly because it was the only Christian power that tolerated slavery at home. British Christians catechized all our ministers upon this question, and refused the right hand of fellowship to such as could not clear themselves of the suspicion of looking upon the slave-system with leniency or indifference. All Europe understood that the last presidential election turned upon the question of the prohibition of slavery in the territories-in fact, upon the question, whether the slave-interest should be national or local. Abroad the election of Mr. Lincoln was well nigh universally hailed as an indication that the power of slavery was broken, and that the free North would exercise in our national councils the supremacy to which it was entitled by its numerical superiority, and by its devotion to free labor, free speech, and human rights. The Great Republic was greeted as disenthralled from the fatal spell that had so long held it in bondage to a system which sacrificed the general welfare to the exorbitant demands of a slave-holding minority and oligarchy. But no sooner was the rebellion fairly inaugurated by the Confederate States, than all this applause was suddenly changed into doubt, reproach or denunciation. The disruption of the Republic seemed to be assumed as a foregone conclusion. Apologies were invented for the South, and calumnies for the North. The war was "deplored" (the pet word) as a terrible struggle for a chimerical and undesirable result. The lust of conquest was stigmatised as the moving spring of the North, and the love of independence applauded as the passion of the South. The right of Secession was violently maintained by journalists that had evidently never seen our Constitution. Slavery, it was squarely asserted, had really nothing to do with the strife. It was even gravely maintained, that if Englishmen wanted to see the slavetrade abolished, and emancipation made sure and easy, they must sympathize with the Confederate States. The vaunted British sympathy, more often extolled than tested, for the weaker and oppressed party, was invoked in favor of the persecuted Southern States, who only wanted to secure their independence. Besides, if the South succeeded, republicanism was surely a failure, as sagacious Englishmen had always said it must be. Also, if the South succeeded, it would have free trade with England, and free trade is a very great blessing - for England, which has so many manufactured goods to sell in the dearest markets, and raw goods to buy in the cheapest. And would it not, after all, be better to have the new slave republic succeed (especially as it had prohibited the slave trade,) than to have the Great Republic subdue it; for in the latter case, the power of republicanism would be proved mightier than any other form of government; whereas, if the South established its independence, it would certainly need a stronger government than before, possibly an aristocracy in form as well as in fact, and this would go to show that aristocracy is conducive to the well-being of states. Even if it were a slave republic, that would not make any English man love slavery more; whereas, if the United States triumphed, and all the States were reunited as one free republic, this would give greater warrant and license than ever before to the insolent radical faction under "our venerable constitution," who have been trying to prove by Western example, that the masses may wisely be entrusted with a greater share of that political power which all conservatives hold should be administered, not by the people, but for them. Some ulterior consequences about Canada, the British West Indies, commercial supremacy, naval power, and kindred matters, were also incidentally suggested to reflecting minds. The net result of the whole calculation was thus very clearly made out to be something like this: if the South succeed, England will be a gainer in divers ways (even though, parenthetically, humanity be the loser); but if the North succeed, nobody can tell what may happen, though it is quite probable that the British Isles will not receive any immediate benefit. Serious-minded philanthropists were also prompted to inquire whether, after all, humanity would suffer 80 very much from the triumph of the South. There are surely men, and gentlemen and Christians (as well as cotton) there in abundance, in spite of their horrible system of slavery; and if they can only be brought into intimate fellowship with the British people, and bound to it by ties of gratitude, may it not reasonably be expected in the course of time that they would be persuaded to treat their poor slaves a little better? Moreover, may there not have been some gross exaggerations about this matter of slavery? The North is very jealous of the South; and it is plainly the interest of the planters to treat their chattels well, or else they could not produce so many bales of cotton of such a long and fine staple. Thoughtful English philantrophists and traders deeply pondered such obvious considerations. De Tocqueville is acknowledged to have written the best book on American Democracy; the same shrewd critic in his Memoirs also tells us : "In the eyes of an Englishman a cause is just, if it be the interest of England that it should succeed. A man or a government that is useful to England, has every kind of merit, and one that does England harm, every sort of fault." He also adds, that it is "the conviction of all nations that England considers them only with reference to her own greatness, that she never notices what passes among foreigners, what they think, feel, suffer, or do, but with relation to the use which England can make of their actions, their sufferings, their feelings and their thoughts; and that when she seems most to care for them, she really cares only for herself.” This severe judgment of a philosophical observer seems to be confirmed by the course of the British people in relation to the present crisis in our national affairs. By the closest ties of descent, language and commerce, by traditional regard for the authority of constitutions, and by the inborn love of human rights, as well as by treaties of amity, they were allied to our General Government. When the rebellion broke out, the whole North felt and said, England will surely give us its moral support. And this on two grounds, if on no other; first, the maintenance of the rightful authority of a constitutional government against the assaults of perjured conspirators and traitors; and, secondly, in the interest of human freedom as against the retrograde movement tendencies and inherent selfishness, if not barbarity of the slave power. Here we supposed were fixed facts as to the side to which England would gravitate in its political and moral sympathies. But it was soon found that we were imposed upon by the delusions of a dream. with one consent, the leading journals, representing the aristocratic, the commercial, and also the religious opinions of Great Britain, began to show the most inexplicable dislike of the United States, and to pour out upon it a torrent of abusive misrepresentation, and perversion of principles and facts, almost unequalled in the fiercest excitement even of a local, political debate. Ав |