THE PRESS.
From the Senate the question was transferred to the great arena where pamphlets, reviews, and newspapers were the disputants. Here the opposition in the Senate found frequent expression. The Resolutions by their positive character offered a full front, and they were openly attacked.
Public meetings and committees also made them the subject of discussion,—especially a great meeting at Cooper Institute, New York, and a meeting of the German Republican Committee in New York, where they were fully sustained.[156]
The North American Review,[157] in an elaborate article, under the title of “Constitutional Law,” afterwards published in a pamphlet with the author’s name[158] on the title-page, treated the Resolutions with a severity which may be judged by the concluding words.
“It is to be hoped that disloyalty will not become more general by reason of threats of conquest, or by propositions that the United States shall become administrator de bonis non of the seceding States. One description of treason against the United States consists ‘in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.’ Mr. Conway[159] and Mr. Sumner have given the ‘aid and comfort.’ Had they sent in their adhesion at the same time, they would have done the Union much less mischief.”
Not content with this article, the learned author addressed the following letter to the Boston Journal.
“Unconstitutional Legislation.
“Dear Sir,—Will you permit me to say, that, the sooner the Republican party cuts itself loose from all unconstitutional projects (whether they relate to emancipation by proclamation, conquering States and holding them as Territories, confiscation without trial, or any other measure not warranted by the Constitution), the sooner it will begin to provide for its own salvation.
“Very truly yours,
“Joel Parker.