electing one of several sons 'subject to draft,' is that they are 'aged
or infirm'. When this is done, boards of enrolment must grant the
exemption. The parents may live in affluence independent of their
children; the sons may all be in the second class except the one
elected; they may reside in different districts or States; they may
belong to different households: yet, if the same parents, or some
indigent widow adjoining them, had but _one_ son 'liable to military
duty,' or, having _several_, had sent them all into the army save _one_,
that one remaining could not be exempt unless it were proven that they
actually depended on him for their support. Why should a helpless widow,
having but _one_ son, be required to prove her dependence on him for
support in order to have him exempted, when her wealthy neighbor, who
has _two_ sons, can have one of them exempted without this dependence?
Another published 'opinion' says: 'Election of the son to be exempted
must be made _before_ the draft.' Now amid the chances of a draft it may
happen that the brother or brothers of the elected son may not be drawn.
Thus the Government loses the services of the entire family. In many
cases no election would be necessary unless _all_ the sons were drafted,
in which case it could be made as well _after_ as _before_ the draft.
Besides, if there be a considerable interval between the time of
election and the time of draft, the ground of exemption may no longer
exist when the Government calls for the service of the man.
On clause sixth an 'opinion' has been issued, stating that 'the father
of motherless children under twelve years of age, dependent upon his
labor for their support, is exempt, notwithstanding he may have married
a second time and his wife be living.'
A stepmother is not believed to be a 'mother' in the sense of the act.
Another 'opinion' declares that the father of children of an insane
mother under twelve years of age dependent on his labor for support, is
_not_ exempt.
A moment's reflection on these two 'opinions' is sufficient to establish
their injustice. A stepmother may and should, in all important respects,
take the place of the actual mother. Yet the father is exempt. Children
of an insane mother, however, may be left entirely without maternal care
and protection, and the father, upon whom may rest the burden of
children and wife, is _not_ exempt.
Clause seventh reads as follows: 'Where there are a father and sons in
the same family and household, and two of them are in the military
service of the United States, as non-commissioned officers, musicians,
or privates, the residue of such family or household, not exceeding two,
shall be exempt.'
In reading this clause, the question naturally arises: Why is this
provision made applicable only to families in which the father is still
living? Why should not a widow, having two uncommissioned sons in the
army, have her remaining son exempt, as well as if her husband were
still living? Judge Holt has decided that 'a widow having four sons,
three of whom are already in the military service, the fourth is exempt,
_provided_ she is dependent on his labor for support.' If the father
were living, the remaining son would be absolutely exempt.
The evident design of this clause is to take into consideration the
amount which each family may have contributed to the service. But this
generous intention is practically ignored by another 'opinion,' which
makes it necessary that two members of the same family must be _now_ in
service, in order that the exempting clause may apply. Thus, by the
calamities of war, a father and several sons may have been killed or
rendered helpless for life, yet if there remains a son liable to draft
in the same family, he cannot be exempted unless his mother depends on
him for her support. It must be admitted that the parent or parents who
have had two sons _killed_ in their country's service, have made quite
as great a sacrifice as those who have two sons still engaged in that
service. And if the question of support is involved, it is reasonable to
suppose that two sons in the army would do quite as much for needy
parents as two sons in the grave.
These are some of the inconsistencies of the law, as it has been
interpreted by authority. Other cases also may arise that seem to demand
an exempting clause equally with those in the act. Of such are the
following:
First, the husband and father of a family depending upon his labor for
their support.
Second, the only support of an aged or infirm spinster or bachelor.
It is not unusual for persons of this class to adopt the son of a
relative or stranger. And when the infirmities of age render such
persons unfit for toil, the youth whom they brought up, and who is now
by his labor repaying their early attentions to him, should, not be
taken away.
Third, the only support of helpless children, having neither parents nor
grown brothers.
Orphans are often thrown upon the charity of a relative, and it seems
right that their support should not be taken from them. In view of the
many difficulties presented by the subject of exemptions, the many
diverse claims that arise, and the impossibility of making a special
provision for each, would it not be better to adopt a few general
principles on the subject, and submit all claims to the judgment of the
boards of enrolment? Thus, instead of clauses second to sixth, inclusive
of the second section, there might be a single proviso that--No person
who is dependent by reason of age, bodily, or mental infirmity, shall,
by the operations of this act, be deprived of his or her necessary and
accustomed support. This would include all possible cases, and would
secure to each the necessary maintenance, as designed by the law. It
would do away with the necessity of an unlimited issue of circulars of
explanation from the Department at Washington, throwing each case upon
the judgment of the board, who are to be presumed able to decide
intelligently on proper evidence being given before them. It would avoid
the unjust and injurious distinctions noticed under clause fourth, and
in the end would secure more men to the Government with less liability
of wrong to the citizen. Clause seventh also could easily be so modified
as to avoid the objections noticed above.
Another evident objection to the act of March 3d, is the limited power
given to boards of enrolment as such. All clerks, deputy marshals, and
special officers, are appointed by the Provost-Marshal alone. Yet a
large--perhaps the _chief_ part of their duty is directly connected with
the enrolment and draft. The judgment of the remaining members of the
board would certainly be of some value in making these appointments, as
they are always residents of the district, and hence acquainted with the
peculiar wants of the service and the character of the applicants. The
duties of the commissioner should also be more definitely stated.
Special duties are assigned to the marshal and surgeon, but no further
definition of the commissioner's labor is given than that he is a member
of the board. Thus there is liability to a conflict of authority and a
shirking of responsibility, which could easily be avoided by more
explicit divisions of duty. The board system is undoubtedly a good one.
It gives _the people_ a larger representation in the business of
conducting a draft, tends to secure justice to all, and thus relieves
the popular prejudice and feeling of opposition to the law itself.
But why should not every board of enrolment throughout the country also
be a board of enlistment? The time is fast approaching when the bulk of
our present army will return home. It is important that as many of these
men be reënlisted as can be, with any new troops that may offer
themselves. The Government should avail itself of every opportunity for
making voluntary enlistments. And by having a recruiting office within
every district, convenient to every man's residence, a surgeon always at
hand to examine applicants, offering the authorized Government bounties,
much could still be done in this way toward keeping an army in the
field, without any additional expense or without in the least
interfering with the draft.
The act of March 3d is a law for the present, not for the future. It is
an act for the emergency, not for coming time.
During the long years of peace and prosperity that we have enjoyed, the
great truth that every able-bodied man owes military service to his
country as sacredly as he owes protection to his family, has slumbered
in the minds of the people. For half a century there was scarcely
anything to remind us of it, and we were fast verging into that hopeless
national condition, when
'Wealth accumulates and men decay.'
This act brings duty home to the conscience of the nation. It is an
impressive enforcement of a great political principle. But if our
quickened sense of obligation fail to make us _act_, if we refuse to
receive the lessons of wisdom which the developments of the hour force
upon us, if we fail to improve our military organization and
instruction, and render our able-bodied men effective for military
service at a moment's call--then this act will have done us little
permanent good. Our men of education and high social position, instead
of aiding to make the militia system respectable by the personal
performance of military duty and by using their influence to give tone
and character to the service, have evaded its requirements on
themselves, and have aided in sinking it into disrepute and contempt.
And here is where our militia laws are imperfect. They have done but
little toward cherishing the military spirit, developing the military
virtues, or securing an effective military force ready at any time to
take the field.
In the future of our country we want no large standing army. It is
contrary to the genius of our institutions and to national precedent. We
must throw the duty of national support and defence directly on the
people--to them commit our country's honor. The Swiss motto--'No regular
army, but every citizen a soldier'--must be the foundation of our
military system. The course of the present war has fully demonstrated
the patriotism and loyalty of the people. The Government can rely upon
its citizens in any emergency. What we want is discipline,
organization, instruction. The act of March 3d does not secure these
essential requisites. It has enrolled the people, but has not made them
soldiers. We will not here attempt to describe how this can be secured.
But we may take it for granted that there must be greater facilities for
the military education of the young and the training of officers, a
proper division of the country into military districts, and stated times
for the drill and review of the citizen soldiery. Thus we shall be able
to maintain our national existence against invasion from without and
rebellion from within, and, being prepared for war, will be so much the
more likely to live in peace.
EDITOR'S TABLE.
With the present number, THE CONTINENTAL enters upon a new
volume. No efforts will be spared by its editors to increase its value
to its many patrons. The high character of its political articles,
always emanating from distinguished men and from reliable sources; its
loyal tone and catholic spirit; the great ability with which the
subjects of the deepest interest to the Government and community are
discussed in its pages--entitle it to a high, if not the highest place
among the journals of the country.
It is intended to give utterance to the wants, wishes, tastes, views,
hopes, culture of every part of our Union. Having no band of sectional
collaborators, with local views and prejudices, narrowed horizons and
similar cultivation, it is confined to no clique of thinkers however
vigorous, no set of men however cultured, but receives thought and light
from every part of our vast country, without favor or prejudice. It is
the _Continental_, and thus represents and addresses itself to the mind
of the continent.
The contributions flowing in, in a continuous stream from every quarter,
are subjected to but one great test--the test of real and substantial
merit. Thoroughly Christian in the noblest sense of that noble word, it
is never sectarian. Accepting Christianity as a _certain_ fact, it
rejects no scientific inquiry into its bases, convinced that all true
and thorough investigation will but lead men back to faith in a divine
Redeemer. Shallow thought and nascent inquiry may be sceptical, but the
deep mind is reverential and faithful. The problems of doubt torture the
soul, and call for solution. Infinite and finite stand in strange
relations in the mind of man; with his finite powers he would grasp the
infinite of God. He fails to find the equation of his terms, and,
baffled in his search, in the insanity of intellectual pride, denies his
Maker. He puts the infinite mysteries of revelation into the narrow
crucible of the finite, the residuum is--nothing; he calls it immutable
laws, as if laws could exist without a lawgiver, and bows before a
pitiless phantom, where he should love and worship the great I AM!
Examine fearlessly into nature, O earnest thinker, for the created is
but the veil of the Creator. Revelation and nature are from the same
God, and both demand our serious attention. Revelation is indeed the
Word of Nature; the sole key to its many wards of mystery. Truth never
contradicts itself. Let the savant, whether in material nature or
metaphysical realms, examine, classify, and arrange his facts--they,
when fairly computed, thoroughly investigated, can lead but to one
conclusion.
Nor will the literary department of this magazine be permitted to
languish. Tales, poems, and articles on art and artists, are solicited
from all who feel they have something to say, to which the human heart
will gladly listen. The talent of the East, West, North, and South shall
flow through our pages. Genius shall be welcomed and acknowledged,
though it may not as yet have registered its name on the radiant walls
of the Temple of Fame. It is the design of THE CONTINENTAL to
represent humanity in its different phases; to manifest to its readers
the thoughts of their fellow beings; to hold up the mirror of our mental
being to the complex human soul. Varied modes of thought and views of
life will be represented in our pages, for as men, nothing that concerns
humanity can be alien to us. We thus hope to be enabled to offer our
readers a wide range of subjects, treated from varied standpoints,
handled by writers widely scattered in space and severed in social
position. May the divergent rays be blended in a bow of beauty, of peace
and promise to the ark of truth! No personal bitterness shall find place
among us, no immoral lessons sully our record. There may be often want
of pruning, but even the undue luxuriance shall tell of the rich soil
of genius, ever germing and budding into prolific growth.
Meantime let our patrons continue to trust us, and have patience with
our shortcomings. All that is human is liable to error, and the very
width and breadth of our base increases the difficulty of the temple we
would rear.
Lend us your sympathies and moral aid, courteous reader, for many and
complicated are the difficulties with which an editor has to contend.
For example: 'Your review is quite too serious for success,' says the
first; 'its subjects are too heavy and grave; our people read for
amusement; you should give us more stories and light reading.'
'Your review is too light,' says the second; 'the times are pregnant
with great events, humanity is on its onward march, and a magazine such
as yours ought to be, should have no space to throw away upon
sentimental tales and modern poetry. Your articles should lead our
statesmen on to the deeper appreciation of political truths, expose
vital fallacies, and not strive to amuse silly women and effeminate
men.'
'You do not deal sufficiently with metaphysics,' says a third; 'you
should reproduce in popular and intelligible form the vast thoughts of
Kant, Fichte, Hegel, Schelling, Oken, Ronski, and Trentowski.'
'Why do you give us so much metaphysics?' cries the fourth; 'modern
philosophy is essentially infidel; you should not introduce its
poisonous elements among our people.'
'Such a review as you conduct,' remarks a fifth, 'should be the vehicle
of the thinkers and progressives; they alone are the men to benefit and
attract the attention of the community.'
'Take great care to have nothing to do with the men calling themselves
progressive thinkers,' remarks a sixth; 'they are full of vital errors,
spiritualists, socialists, disorganizers. They have in reality nothing
new to offer; they are the old-clothes men of thought, harlequins
juggling in old Hindoo raiment, striding along in old German May-fair
rags, long since discarded--motley's their only wear--stalking
Cagliostros and Kings of Humbug.'
'You are growing old fogy in your views,' says the seventh; 'we can bear
sermons enough in church of Sundays; we do not buy magazines to read
them there.'
'Your journal is fast becoming an Abolition organ,' says the eighth.
'Do you mean to oppose the Administration and distress the Government?'
says the ninth.
'You give us no history,' sighs the tenth.
'What do you mean by your long historical disquisitions?' vociferates
the eleventh. 'Nobody cares for the past now. Our hands are full of the
present. We are ourselves living the most important history which this
globe has yet seen.'
Courteous reader, so it goes on forever, through all the unceasing
changes of thought, heart, mind, soul, taste, which characterize the
great, acting, struggling, thinking, conservative, progressive,
believing, doubting, Young American people.
Meanwhile we will earnestly strive to hold up the glass of the
constantly shifting times before you, that you may be enabled to see the
flitting shadows of the hour as they pass across it, grave or gay,
portentous or hopeful, draped in solid political vesture, the toga of
the statesman, or robed in the blue gossamer of metaphysics, in the
drapery of sorrow or light hues of joy, in the tried armor of the
Divine, or the dubious motley of the progressive, in the soft, floating,
lustrous, aërial texture of the woman, or the monotonous Shanghai of the
man--while we will forever strive to point you to the Cross of Peace,
the Heavenly City, and the starry diadem of Eternal Truth. You may read
in our pages of 'immutable laws,' for such is the term now in vogue, but
you will remember that these words are but a veil used by the scientist
to hide the Eternal and Unchangeable Will, the Personal God, the Hearer
of Prayer, the Father of Creation. The kaleidoscope of nature, however
rudely shaken, through all its multiplicity of fragments, forever falls
back into the holy figure of God:
'Mirrors God maketh all atoms in space,
And fronteth each one with His perfect Face.'
How long, lovely, and glowing has our autumn been, with its dreamy days
and soft shadowy mists. In its surpassing beauty it is peculiar to our
own loved land, and thus doubly dear to the hearts of Americans. Our
mountains borrowed the rainbow, dressing themselves in its changing
hues, holding up the great forests, like clustered bouquets, in their
giant palms, as if offering their dying children to God in the very
hour of their mature beauty. Crimsons and purples, oranges, golds,
yellows, browns, greens, and scarlet dye the trees; gathered sheaves and
golden pumpkins, marguerites, feathery golden rods, and bright blue
gorse are on every field. Have we not, in very truth, a country for
which a patriot should gladly die, and the devout heart never cease to
quiver in prayer that God may vouchsafe to bless?
One of our patriot poets has sent us the stirring hymn of the
Cumberland. Let him chant it here, while we grave in our hearts the
grateful memory of the brave crew who perished with her, martyrs in a
holy cause:
THE CUMBERLAND.
Fast poured the traitors' shot and shell,
Where at their posts our gunners fell:
Our starboard portholes make reply--
Each takes his comrade's place to die;
All time shall yield no battle field
Grand as thy deck, our Cumberland!
Oh, crashing shock! our beams divide,
And death flows inward with the tide.
O'er gory decks,'mid sulphur smoke,
The climbing waters madly broke;
Our banner spread, still waved o'er head,
Above the sinking Cumberland.
The wounded cheer,--the dying wave,
While sinking to their watery grave,
With straining sight and grateful prayer,
Exultant that the Flag is there;--
Nor thought of life to glory's strife,
But of their ship, the Cumberland.
The vessel sinks;--her latest breath
Hurls through the cannons' mouth of death
Defiance at the traitor foes!
O'er guns the throttling waters close--
The hungry wave devours the brave--
The gallant crew of Cumberland!
No sailor yields; they gladly die;
Above them still the colors fly!
High o'er the black and surging flood,
That reels as drunk with patriots' blood,
Those glorious bars and Freedom's stars
Float o'er the sunken Cumberland!
Deeds like these will live forever--
Loyal hearts forget them never!
Hark! echoes from the brave and free,
Greet us from far Thermopylæ:
All time shall ring while bards shall sing
The Martyrs of the Cumberland!
In Glory's sky, 'mid heroes bright,
Immortal galaxy of light,
Through future ages shall they be,
The _Color Bearers_ of the Free!
The sleeping brave, in ocean's wave,
Who manned the Frigate Cumberland.
Our monthly will enter many a home during the coming holidays--the eight
days consecrated to the memory of the most sublime record in the history
of mankind, the union of the Divine with the human, the introduction of
a human heart into the impenetrable but truly philosophical mystery of
the Trinity. Do we ever sufficiently realize the duties which this
marvellous union has enjoined upon us, the privileges with which it has
endowed us?
We shall enter many a home--some joyous with the mirth of children, the
hopefulness of youth, the serene happiness of useful and contented men
and women;--some shadowed by recent sorrow, where perhaps patriots, as
in the olden time, learn to endure for the sake of a beloved
country;--or others, perchance, where worldliness, discord, and egotism
have severed hearts that should be united. God grant the number of the
latter may be few! Happy should we be, could we know that our arrival
would bring one more smile to the lips of the gay, a single ray of
support or consolation to the souls of the sorrowing--could we cause the
world-worn to dream of better and brighter things than mere matter can
ever afford, give the thinker a pregnant thought, soothe earth's weary
art-children with the hope of wider comprehension and sympathy, lead the
rich to open upward paths to their poorer brethren, or the poor nobly to
bear or to better their humble condition--in a word, could we offer but
single drops of that wine of immortal life for which every human soul is
thirsting.
Frost and cold now are upon us; Christmas passing with its typal
evergreens and mystic chants; the old year dying fast with its weird
secrets buried until the Day of Doom; the New Year close upon us, with
its demands and duties. May the Heavenly Father bless its fleeting
hours, and enable us to sow them closely with the precious seeds of good
deeds,--germs to blossom on the Eternal Shore!
AMERICAN THANKSGIVING DAY IN LONDON.
NOVEMBER 25, 1863.
[The following report of the proceedings at the Thanksgiving Dinner
in London arrived too late to be incorporated in the body of
THE CONTINENTAL; in consequence, however, of its immediate
interest to our readers, we have decided upon giving it to them,
even if it must appear as a supplement. It is surely a very
pleasant thing to know that our patriots abroad consecrated the
festival by grateful thanks to the Giver of all good; and that
public and loyal utterances were made of the great national truths
which, in our present crisis, it is of such vital importance to
make known to the men and governments of other countries.--ED.
CONTINENTAL.]
In pursuance of the proclamation of the President of the United States,
addressed to all citizens, at home and abroad, the loyal Americans now
in England, to the number of several hundred, assembled at St. James
Hall to dinner. The Hon. Robert J. Walker presided, assisted by Hon.
Freeman H. Morse (our Consul here), and Girard Ralston, Esq. On the
right of Mr. Walker sat the American Minister, Mr. Adams, and on the
left, George Thompson, Esq., late M. P. from London. After the reading
of the proclamation, the prayer, and the hymn, Mr. Walker addressed the
company as follows: