EDITOR’S TABLE

The proclamation of President Lincoln in reference to General Hunter, and the bold measures of the latter calling forth Executive interference, form one of the most interesting episodes of the war of Freedom.  Regarded from the high standpoint whence acts are seen as controlled by circumstances and formed by events, the conduct of the one public functionary, as of the other, will appear to the future historian in a very different light from that in which it has been presented by either the radical or democratic journals of the day.  He will speak of the one as a military chieftain under the influence of worthy motives, cutting a Gordian knot which the higher and controlling diplomatic and executive superior wished should be cautiously untied.  The one has acted with a view to promptly settling a great trouble within his own sphere—­the other wisely comprehending that the action was premature, has decisively countered it.  By attempting to free the slaves, General Hunter has shown himself a friend of freedom and a man of bold measures; by annulling his acts Mr. Lincoln has availed himself of an excellent opportunity of proving to the South and to the world that he is not, as was said, a sectional or an Abolition President, and that with the strongest sympathies for freedom, he is determined to respect the rights even of enemies, and leave behind him a clear record, as one who did nothing wrongly, and who with keen and wide comprehending glance took in the times as they were, and acted accordingly.

Meanwhile to the most prejudiced vision it is apparent that the great cause of Emancipation has gained vastly by this little struggle between the shepherd and that unruly member of the flock who would dash a little too impetuously ahead of his fellows.  The proclamation of President Lincoln contains but cold comfort for the pro-slavery democracy, although they affect to rejoice over it.  In vain may they declare, as they did of the celebrated ‘remunerating message,’ that it is very palatable, and vow that it ’creates fresh hope and gives a new and needed assurance to the conservative men of the nation.’  The sour faces of their pro-slavery, Southern-adoring, English-ruled, traitorous friends is an effectual answer to their hypocrisy.  We have not forgotten how warmly the Democratic press indorsed the message of January 6th, or how the Democratic multitude kicked against it in public meetings.

Let the Democratic tories of the day who find this message so consolatory, duly weigh the following extract from it: