Chapter VIII (4)

The most able military commander that Russia has produced was in person miserably thin, and five feet one inch in height. A large mouth, pug nose, eyes commonly half shut, a few gray side locks, brought over the top of his bald crown, and a small unpowdered queue, the whole surmounted by a three-cornered felt hat ornamented with green fringe, composed the “head and front” of Field-marshal Suwarow; but his eyes, when open, were piercing, and in battle they were said to be terrifically expressive. When any thing said or done displeased him, a wavy play of his deeply-wrinkled forehead betrayed, or rather expressed, his disapproval. He had a philosophical contempt for dress, and might often be seen drilling his men in his shirt sleeves. It was only during the severest weather that he wore cloth his outer garments being usually of white serge turned up with green. These were the most indifferently made, as were his large, coarsely greased slouching boots; one of which he very commonly dispensed with, leaving his kneeband unbuttoned, and his stocking about his heel. A huge sabre and a single order completed his ordinary costume; but on grand occasions his field-marshal’s uniform was covered with badges, and he was fond of telling where and how he had won them. He often arose at midnight, and welcomed the first soldier he saw moving with a piercing imitation of the crowing of a cock, in compliment to his early rising. It is said that in the first Polish war, knowing a spy was in the camp, he issued orders for an attack at cock-crow, and the enemy expecting it in the morning, were cut to pieces at nine at night—Suwarow having turned out the troops an hour before by his well-known cry. The evening before the storm of Ismail, he informed his columns—“To-morrow morning, an hour before daybreak, I mean to get up. I shall then dress and wash myself, then say my prayers, and then give one good cock-crow, and capture Ismail.” When Ségur asked him if he never took off his clothes at night, he replied, “No! when I get lazy, and want to have a comfortable sleep, I generally take off one spur.” Buckets of cold water were thrown over him before he dressed, and his table was served at seven or eight o’clock with sandwiches and various messes which Duboscage describes as “_des ragouts Kosaks detestables_;” to which men paid “the mouth honor, which they would fain deny, but dare not,” lest Suwarow should consider them effeminate. He had been very sickly in his youth, but by spare diet and cold bathing had strengthened and hardened himself into first-rate condition.

MONTHLY RECORD OF CURRENT EVENTS.

United States.

Public attention, during the month, has been mainly fixed upon Kossuth, in his addresses to the various portions of the people of the United States with whom he is brought in contact. After the banquet given to him, December 16th, by the New York Press, noticed in our last Record, Kossuth remained in New York until Tuesday, the 23d. The Bar of New York gave him a public reception and banquet on the 18th, at which he made a speech devoted mainly to the position, that the intervention of Russia in the affairs of Hungary was a gross violation of the law of nations, deserving the name of piracy; and that the United States was bound alike in interest and in duty, to protest against it. He conceded fully that if such a protest should be made, and treated with contempt, the United States would be bound in honor to enforce it by war. At the same time he declared his conviction that there was not the slightest danger of war, and entered into some historical details to show that Russia would never interfere in Hungarian affairs, until she was assured that England and the United States would not resist her.—At the dinner, speeches were made by several prominent members of the bar. Judge Duer, after a long and very eloquent eulogy of Kossuth and his cause, was going on to reply to his argument in favor of the interference of this country for the protection of international law, but the company refused to allow him to proceed.—On the 20th, in the afternoon, Kossuth addressed a large company of ladies assembled to meet him, in a speech of exquisite beauty and touching eloquence. He also delivered an address at the church of the Rev. H. W. Beecher, in Brooklyn, in which he spoke of the question of religious liberty, as it is involved in the Hungarian struggle.—During his stay in New York he was waited on by a great number of deputations from different sections of the country, and from different classes of the community, who all made formal addresses to him which were answered with wonderful pertinence and tact.

On the 23d he left for Philadelphia, and had a public reception the next day in the old Hall where independence was declared in 1776. His speech was merely one of thanks. He was entertained at a public dinner in the evening, and at another on the evening of Friday, the 26th. His speech on the latter occasion was devoted mainly to the usurpation of Louis Napoleon, which he regarded as having been dictated by the absolute powers of Europe, and as certain to end in his destruction. The struggle in Europe between the principles of freedom and despotism would only be hastened by this act, and he appealed earnestly to the United States for a decision, as to whether they would protest against Russian intervention in Hungarian affairs.

On the 27th he went to Baltimore, where he was most enthusiastically received. In the evening he made a speech of an hour and a half to the citizens at the hall of the Maryland Institute, in which he set forth the connection between Hungary and the rest of Europe, and the reasons why the United States could not remain indifferent to struggles for liberty in any part of the world.

On Tuesday, the 30th, he went to Washington, and was received at the cars by the Senate Committee. Very soon after his arrival he was waited upon by Mr. Webster, and a great number of other distinguished persons. He also received a deputation from the Jackson Democratic Association, and one from the clergy, making to the addresses of both pertinent replies. On Wednesday, the 31st, he was received by President Fillmore at the Executive Mansion. In a brief and admirable address he expressed his fervent thanks for the interest taken by the United States in his liberation from captivity and in the cause he represented, and for the action of the President himself in connection with it. He referred, with warm satisfaction to the declaration in the President’s Message, that the people of this country could not remain indifferent when the strong arm of a foreign power is invoked to stifle public sentiment and to repress the spirit of freedom in any country. The President replied very briefly, saying that the policy of this country had been long settled, and that his own sentiments had been freely expressed in his Message; and his language upon those points would be the same in speaking to foreign nations as to our own—On Wednesday, the 7th, he was formally invited into both Houses of Congress. In the evening he was present at a public dinner given to him by a large number of members of Congress, and other distinguished persons. His speech on that occasion was a terse and most eloquent sketch of the position of his country—of its relation to the principles of liberty, and of the influence upon Europe of the history and example of the United States. To give that influence its full weight, it was necessary that the nations of Europe should be left free to manage their own concerns.—Mr. Webster, on this occasion, also made a long and eloquent speech, expressing the highest appreciation of Kossuth, his country and his cause, and declaring his belief that Hungary was admirably fitted for self-government, and his wish for the speedy establishment of her independence. He said he would not enter upon any discussion of the principles involved in this question as it is now presented, because he had already and repeatedly expressed his views in regard to them. Referring to his speech upon the Greek Revolution in 1823, and to his letter to the Austrian Chargé, M. Hulsemann, he said he was prepared to repeat them word for word and to stand by every thing he had said on those occasions. General Cass also made an eloquent speech avowing his full and most cordial assent to the doctrine that the United States ought to interfere to prevent Russian intervention against the independence of Hungary. Senator Douglass also expressed his concurrence in these views, but said he would not go for joining England in any such protest until she would do justice to Ireland.

Kossuth left Washington on the 12th of January, for Annapolis, where he remained when this Record was closed.

In Congress no public business of importance had been transacted. Both Houses spent several days in debating the subject of Kossuth’s reception.

The Legislature of New York met at Albany on Tuesday, the 6th of January. The Assembly was organized by electing J. C. Heartt, Speaker, and R. W. Sherman, Clerk—both Whigs. In the Senate, Ira P. Barnes, Democrat, was elected clerk. The Message of Governor Hunt was sent in on the same day. He states the aggregate debt of the State at $21,690,802, which the sinking funds provided will pay off in seventeen years. The aggregate taxable property of the State is set down at $1100,000,000. The canal revenues of the last year were $3,722,163: after meeting all constitutional obligations there remained of this, the sum of $964,432 applicable to the completion of the Canals. The funds devoted to school purposes amount to $6,612,850. The number of children taught during the year was 726,291 and the amount expended in teachers’ wages, was $1,432,696. The whole number of insane persons in the state is 2506; convicts in the State prisons, 1714. Referring to national topics, the Message regrets the feelings of hostility sometimes evinced between different sections—saying that “the Constitution having wisely left the States free to regulate their domestic affairs, the dissimilarity in their local institutions furnishes no just ground for mutual complaints and reproaches.” He trusts that the spirit of disunion and that of fanaticism will both exhaust themselves without endangering the stability of our national institutions. Considering at some length the condition and prospects of the African race in this country, he warmly commends to favor the scheme of colonization, and the societies formed to carry it out.

The Legislature of Pennsylvania organized at Harrisburgh, on the 6th. In the House, John S. Rhey, Democrat, was chosen Speaker, receiving 54 out of 88 votes. In the Senate, Mr. Muhlenberg, Democrat, was elected. The Message of Governor Johnston states that the Commonwealth was never in a more prosperous condition. The amount of the public debt is $40,114,236, having been reduced over $700,000 during the last three years, without retarding any of the interests, or useful plans of the State.

Henry Clay, in a letter dated Dec. 17, and addressed to the General Assembly of Kentucky, resigns his seat in the Senate of the United States, the resignation to take effect from the first Monday in September, 1852, He states that he accepted the office only to aid in settling those questions which threatened to disturb the peace of the country; and that object having been accomplished, he wishes to enable the present Assembly to choose his successor. In the Kentucky Legislature, Archibald Dixon, (Whig) was elected Senator, on the 30th of December, to fill the vacancy thus created.

The Library of Congress, kept in the Capitol at Washington, was nearly destroyed by fire on the 24th December. About 35,000 volumes were burned, 20,000 being saved. A great number of very valuable paintings, medals, &c. &c., were also destroyed. The cost of the library has not been far from $200,000.

Hon. JOEL R. POINSETT, long known as a prominent public man in the United States, died at his residence in Statesburg, S.C., December 12, aged 73. He was born in South Carolina, educated under the late President Dwight at Greenfield, Conn., and then sent abroad where he spent five years in study and travel. Returning home he studied law, but soon repaired again to Europe, where he visited Russia, and became a special favorite with the Emperor Alexander, who constantly asked him questions about the institutions of the United States, and who once said to him, “If I were not an Emperor, I would be a Republican.” In 1808, he was sent by President Madison on public business to South America. On his return, during the war, he was taken prisoner. In 1821 he was elected to Congress from the Charleston district. In 1822 he was sent to Mexico by President Monroe, to obtain information concerning the government under Iturbide, in which he was very successful. He was subsequently appointed Minister to Mexico, by Mr. Adams, and remained there until 1829. Returning home he served in the State Senate and in 1836 entered President Van Buren’s cabinet as Secretary of War. After retiring from that post, the remainder of his life was spent in literary pursuits.

Professor MOSES STUART, for many years connected with Andover Theological Seminary, and widely known for Biblical learning, died January 4th, aged 71. He was born at Wilton, Connecticut, March 26, 1780, and, after graduating at Yale College in 1799, acted as tutor in that institution for two or three years. In 1806, he was settled as a pastor in New Haven, and was elected Professor of Sacred Literature in Andover Theological Seminary in 1810—a post which he filled ably and acceptably until his death. He has left voluminous and valuable works.

From CALIFORNIA we have intelligence to Dec. 15th. New and extensive deposits of gold have been found near Auburn, in the northern, and at Mariposa, in the southern mines; the lack of rain had caused the yield of gold from them to be small. The aggregate product of all the mines during November was estimated at twenty per cent. less than during the previous month. Several projects of railroads through different sections of the State were under discussion, and the route between San Francisco and San José was being surveyed. The agricultural resources of the State continued to be developed with steady progress. Farming operations had already commenced. Several murders had been perpetrated in various sections. As an evidence of the prosperity of San Francisco, it is stated that seven large steamers were to leave that port, within a week, for different ports on the Pacific and Australia. The Indians have again been committing frightful ravages among the American settlements on the Colorado. The various tribes upon the southeastern border, known to be disaffected, have given unmistakable signs of revolt. Juan Antonio, who had been prominent as an Indian leader, had been forming a league of several tribes, with intent to attack the towns of San Diego, Los Angeles, and Santa Barbara. Three skirmishes had also taken place with the Yumas, on the Colorado, in which several Americans were killed. Great uneasiness prevailed among the inhabitants of the menaced districts. The latest advices represent the danger as less menacing than was feared. Gen. Conde, with 80 troops of the Mexican Boundary Commission, was at Tuson on the 20th Oct., and would leave next day for the Gila.

From OREGON, our news is to Dec. 6, and is encouraging. The difficulties with the Coquille Indians, which had caused the loss of many lives, had been settled. Coal had been found in considerable quantities at Port Orford. The U. S. Coast Survey party were engaged in determining the latitude and longitude of that point, and had completed a map of the harbor. The rainy season had commenced, and the rivers were rising.

From UTAH we have the official report made by the Judges to the President of the United States, concerning the condition of the Territory. They state that they were compelled to leave by the hostile and seditious sentiments of the Governor, Brigham Young; and they give a detailed statement of his proceedings. They represent polygamy as common there, and the courts as powerless to punish any offenses. The delegate from that Territory in Congress complains of the report, as calculated to do injustice to the inhabitants. He demands an investigation into the charges.

From the SANDWICH ISLANDS we have news that the Expedition from California, which was noticed in our last record as being suspected of questionable designs, proves to be entirety innocent. It is said that they were invited over by the King, who desired to have a body of Americans there, in case his proposal for annexation to the United States should be accepted. They had arrived at Honolulu, and engaged peaceably in various pursuits. Some of the English residents evinced uneasiness at their arrival. A resolution had been adopted in Parliament, declaring that the demands of France were so unjust as to warrant the King, in case of necessity, in putting the Islands under the protection of some friendly power, and pledging the support of the nation to whatever he might think it proper to do.

From MEXICO we have intelligence to the 20th of December. A riot occurred, in consequence of rumored misconduct of the French Consul, in importing goods without paying the duties upon them. Several persons were killed. News had been received of the success of the government troops who were sent to oppose Caravajal’s second attempt at insurrection in the northern departments. Congress closed its extra session on the 14th of December; the President, in his speech, said he should have been very glad to congratulate them upon the realization of important reforms, but he could not do so. No new sources of unhappiness, however, had arisen, and financial matters had been put upon such a basis, that the next Congress could solve existing difficulties. Harmony prevailed between the State and the Central Governments; the army had preserved the nationality of the country, when it was threatened on the frontier. The foreign relations of the republic were declared to be entirely satisfactory. Preparations had already been made for electing members of a new Congress, Subsequent accounts received from the northern departments, give the details of the success of the Government troops there. Caravajal was defeated, with a loss of sixty or seventy;—but he had not been apprehended, and at the latest advices, was expecting reinforcements.

South America.

From SOUTH AMERICA the news is not very decisive. _Uraguay_, however, is completely emancipated from the control of Rosas. Oribe’s army is disbanded, his officers have retired to Buenos Ayres, and he himself has retired to private life. Urquiza had left the Montevidean territory with part of his troops, on board Brazilian transports, for Entre Rios, from which he intended to march to Buenos Ayres. The Brazilian army remained in Uraguay, to support the actual government.——In _Chili_, according to latest advices, the revolution noticed some time since, was evidently extending itself more and more. By accounts received at Lima, December 1, Gen. Cruz, the leader of the insurgents, was at Chillan, with 3000 men, having had several engagements with the government troops under Ex-President Bulnes. Col. Carrera had been defeated by the government forces. At Valparaiso a riot occurred on the 28th of November. The mob attacked the barracks, procured arms, and fortified themselves in the Square. They were attacked by the troops under Governor-General Blanco, and dispersed after half an hour’s engagement, in which 80 were killed. The agitation had subsided.——In _Bolivia_ every thing was quiet.——In _New Grenada_ a law has been passed, declaring the whole slave population to be free after January 1, 1852. General Herrara had returned from his visit to the southern provinces, where he had put down all the attempts at insurrection.

Europe.

From GREAT BRITAIN the political news is important. On Monday, the 22d of December, Lord PALMERSTON resigned his position as Foreign Secretary and ceased to be a member of the Cabinet. Earl GRANVILLE was appointed his successor. The cause of this rupture has not been officially announced. The leading papers, however, ascribe it to a difference of opinion, which had risen to decided hostility, between Lord Palmerston and his colleagues, in regard to foreign affairs. The encouragement which the Foreign Secretary gave to KOSSUTH is mentioned among the grounds of difference: but the _Times_, which is likely to be well-informed, asserts, that the subject of distinct and decisive difference was the French usurpation. It says that Lord Palmerston approved decidedly of the step taken by LOUIS NAPOLEON; whereas, the rest of the Cabinet were inclined to censure it. The same authority says that several of the European governments have warmly remonstrated with England, for allowing political refugees to make that country the scene of plots against the peace of the countries they had left. It adds, however, that this was not among the causes of dissension,—Lord GRANVILLE is thirty-seven years old, and has been attached to the English legation in Paris. It will be remembered that he was Chairman of the Council of the Great Exhibition last year. He is a man of considerable ability and diplomatic skill. It is not supposed, however, that he will make his predecessor’s place good as a debater in the House of Commons.

Of other news from Great Britain, there is not much. A large company of London merchants waited upon Lord JOHN RUSSELL on the 9th, to complain of gross mismanagement and inefficiency, on the part of the Commissioners of Customs, and asking the appointment of a Select Committee of Investigation. The Minister replied to many of the complaints, declaring them to be unjust, and declined to say that he would move for a Committee. The whole matter, however, should receive his attention.

A public dinner was given at Manchester, on the 9th, to Mr. R. J. WALKER, formerly American Secretary of the Treasury. In his speech on the occasion, Mr. W. elaborately argued the question of Free Trade, saying that he was in favor of a still farther reduction of the American duties, and calling upon the English to aid them by reducing the duties on tobacco and other imports of American growth. Referring to recent events in France, he avowed his apprehension that a man who had proved himself a traitor, an insurgent, and a military usurper, would not rest content at home, but that England herself was in danger from the progress of despotism upon the Continent. Whenever such a struggle for freedom should be waged in England, he promised them the support of the United States.

In IRELAND a good deal of interest has been excited by the return of emigrants from America. In many cases they were returning for their families—in others, from disappointment and unfitness for work in the United States.——A Mr. Bateson, manager of the great estates of Lord Templeton, in the county of Monoghan, was shot at, and then beaten with bludgeons, so that he died, by three men in the street; the act was in revenge for some evictions he had made against dishonest tenants.

In SCOTLAND a very large meeting was held in Edinburgh on the 9th, to protest against the grant to Maynooth College. In the course of the debates it was stated that 540 petitions, with 307,278 names, had been sent in against the grant. A resolution was adopted, promising to use every possible effort to “procure the passage of a bill for the entire repeal of said grant” at the next session of Parliament.

The events of the month in France have been of transcendent interest. The Constitution has been abolished, the National Assembly dissolved, martial law proclaimed, and the Republic transformed into a Monarchy, elective in name but absolute in fact.

This change was effected by violence on the morning of Tuesday, December 2d. Our Record of last month noticed the dissensions between the President and the Assembly, and the refusal of the latter to abolish the law restricting suffrage, and the failure of its attempt to obtain command over the army. A law was also pending authorizing the impeachment of the President in case he should seek a re-election in violation of the provisions of the Constitution. During the night of Monday the 1st, preparations were made by the President for destroying all authority but his own. He wrote letters to his Ministers announcing to them that he had made up his mind to resist the attempt of his enemies to sacrifice him, and that, as he did not wish them to be compromised by his acts, they had better resign. The hint of course was taken, and they sent in letters of resignation at once. The principal streets of Paris were occupied by strong bodies of troops at about 5 o’clock on Tuesday morning; and before that hour all the leading representatives and military men whom Louis Napoleon knew to be opposed to his designs, were arrested and committed to prison. Detachments of the police, accompanied by portions of the guard, visited their houses, and arrested Generals Cavaignac, Changarnier, De Lamoricière, Bedeau, and Leflo, Colonel Charras, MM. Thiers, Lagrange, Valentine, Panat, Michel (de Bourges), Beaune, Greppo, Miot, Nadaud, Roger (du Nord), and Baze. They were immediately transferred to the Chateau of Vincennes, and subsequently removed to Ham; with the exception of M. Thiers, who was taken to the prison of Mazas. General Changarnier was arrested at his own house at 4 o’clock in the morning. Several other representatives were with him at the time, and were also taken into custody. Gen. C. attempted to harangue the troops who were sent to arrest him, but they refused to listen to him. At the same time that the above arrests were made, commissaries of police were dispatched to the offices of the public journals to suspend some, and regulate the course of others. In the morning the walls of Paris were found to be placarded with a decree, in the following terms: “In the name of the French people, the President of the Republic decrees: 1. The National Assembly is dissolved. 2. Universal suffrage is re-established; the law of the 31st May is repealed. 3. The French people are convoked in their communes from the 14th to the 21st December. 4. The state of siege is decreed in the whole of the first military division. 5. The Council of State is dissolved. 6. The Minister of the Interior is charged with the execution of this decree.—Louis Napoleon Bonaparte.” At a later hour an appeal to the people was issued by the President, and posted upon the walls. It declared that he had dissolved the Assembly, which was attacking his power, and compromising the peace of France. He had faithfully observed the Constitution, but it was his duty to baffle the perfidious plans of those who were seeking to overturn the Republic. He accordingly appealed to the people. He would not consent longer to hold a power ineffective for good: if they wished him to continue in his post, they must give him the means of fulfilling his mission, which was to close the era of revolutions. He submitted to them the basis of a new Constitution, providing: 1. A responsible head named for ten years. 2. Ministers dependent on the Executive power alone. 3. A Council of State, to propose laws and discuss them. 4. A legislative body discussing and voting laws, named by universal suffrage. 5. A second assembly, formed of all the illustrious of the country. He asked them to vote for or against him on this basis. If he did not obtain a majority, he would give up power. A proclamation to the army was issued in a similar manner. He told the soldiers that he counted on them to cause to be respected the sovereignty of the nation, of which he was the legitimate representative. He reminded them of the insults that had been heaped upon them, and called upon them to vote as citizens, but as soldiers to obey. He was alone responsible: it was for them to remain immovable within the rules of discipline.

As soon as these events were generally known, a portion of the members of the Assembly, two hundred in number, assembled at the residence of M. Daru, one of the Vice Presidents of the Assembly. They there decided to go to their usual place of meeting, but they were refused admission by an armed guard. Returning to M. Daru’s house, they were about commencing a session, when a message arrived from Gen. Lauriston, inviting them to the Mairie of the 10th arrondissement, and saying that he was prepared to defend them against all violence. They accordingly repaired thither, organized, and after due deliberation declared the conduct of Louis Napoleon to be illegal, and in violation of the Constitution, and decreed his deposition, in accordance with Art. 68 of that instrument. They also by a decree freed the officers of the army and navy, and all public functionaries, from their oaths of obedience to him, and convoked the High Court of Justice to judge him and his Ministers. The Court did attempt to meet during the day, but was dispersed. The decree was signed by all the members of Assembly present. After this had been done the building was found to be surrounded by troops, to whom M. Berryer announced the deposition of the President and the appointment of General Oudinot, commander-in-chief of all the troops of Paris. The announcement was coldly received, and officers and troops immediately entered the room and dispersed the Assembly. About 150 of the members were afterward arrested and committed to prison for attempting to meet in some other place; after a day’s confinement they were released. Meantime, the most perfect quiet prevailed throughout Paris. No attempt at resistance was made, and the decrees were read and commented on with apparent indifference. The streets and public places were crowded with troops. Dispatches were sent to the departments and were answered by full assurances of assent.

On Wednesday morning was published a list of one hundred and twenty persons appointed by the President as a Consultative Commission, selected because Louis Napoleon “wished to surround himself with men who enjoy, by a just title, the esteem and confidence of the country.” Of these over eighty refused to serve. During the same morning, indications of discontent began to be apparent. At about 10 o’clock, M. Baudin, one of the representatives of the people, made his appearance on horseback, in official dress and with a drawn sword, in the Rue St. Antoine. He was followed by several others, and strove to arouse the people to resistance. Considerable groups collected, and a fragile barricade was erected. Troops soon came up from opposite directions and hemmed them in. The groups were soon dispersed, and M. Baudin, and two other representatives were killed on the spot. Great numbers of troops continued to arrive, and the whole section was speedily occupied by them. On Thursday morning, appearances of insurrection began to be serious. Barricades were erected in several streets. At 12 o’clock the Boulevards were swept by troops, artillery was brought up, and wherever groups of people were seen they were fired upon. It is now known that police officers encouraged the building of barricades in order to give the troops a chance to attack the people. Buildings were battered with cannon, and scores of respectable people were killed at their windows. Throughout the day the troops behaved in the most brutal manner, bayoneting, shooting, and riding over every body within reach. Great numbers of innocent persons were killed in this manner. It would be impossible to give within our limits a tithe of the interesting incidents of the day, illustrating the spirit that prevailed. It is pretty clearly ascertained that the object of the government was to strike terror into all classes, and that for this purpose the troops had been instructed to show no quarter, but to kill every body that threatened resistance. Many of the soldiers were also intoxicated. ’Order’ was in this manner completely restored by evening. But over two thousand people were killed.

From the departments, meantime, came news of resistance. In the frontier districts of the southeast particularly—the whole valley of the Rhone, in fact the whole region from Joigny to Lyons, including several departments, the rural population rose in great strength against the usurpation. There was very hard fighting in the Nievre, in the Herault, and in the frontier districts of the Sardinian and Swiss Alps: and in many places the contest was distinguished by sad atrocities. In the course of two or three days, however, all resistance was quelled.

Preparations were made for the election. The army voted first, and of course its vote was nearly unanimous in favor of Louis Napoleon. The popular election was to take place on Saturday and Sunday, the 20th and 21st of December. The simple question submitted was, whether Louis Napoleon should remain at the head of the state ten years, or not. No other candidate was allowed to be named. Louis Napoleon directed the Pantheon to be restored to its original use as a church, and thereby, as well as by other measures, secured the support of the Catholics. Count Montalembert published a long letter, urging all Catholics throughout France to vote in his favor. The election was conducted quietly—the government discouraging as much as possible the printing and distributing of negative votes. The returns have been received from 68 out of the 86 departments, and these give, in round numbers, 5,400,000 _yes_, and 600,000 _no_. His majority will probably be nearly 7,000,000, which is more than he obtained in 1848.

The London papers state that a correspondence had passed between the governments of England and France upon the subject of Louis Napoleon’s usurpation, in which the former urged a full and explicit declaration of the President’s intentions, and views, as necessary to satisfy the English people in regard to what had already taken place. The replies are said to have been evasive and unsatisfactory. It is stated, also, that Louis Napoleon had directed a circular letter to be prepared, addressed to the various governments of Europe, assuring them of his pacific disposition, and saying that the step he had taken was necessary for the protection of France against the enemies of order.

Marshal Soult died on the 20th of December at his chateau of Soult-berg. He was born March 29,1769—the same year with Napoleon, the Duke of Wellington, Cuvier, Chateaubriand, and Walter Scott, and was 82 years old at the time of his death. He entered the army in 1785, and was subsequently attached to the staff of Gen. Lefebvre. He took part in all the campaigns of Germany until 1799, when he followed Massena into Switzerland and thence to Genoa, where he was wounded and taken prisoner. Set at liberty after the battle of Marengo, he returned to France and became one of the four colonels of the guard of the Consuls. When the empire was proclaimed in 1804 he was made Marshal of France. He subsequently commanded the army in Spain, and in 1813 was made Commander-in-Chief of the Imperial Guard. When Napoleon first landed from Elba he issued a proclamation against him, but soon after became one of his warmest adherents. He was afterward the firm supporter of Louis Philippe, as Minister of War and President of the Council, from which he retired in 1847 to private life. He was the last representative of the imperial era of France.

From AUSTRIA the only news is of new arrests and new restrictions. A number of persons in Hungary, including the mother and the sisters of Kossuth, had been arrested merely on suspicion at Pesth: and a subsequent account announces the death of his mother. The prisoners were removed to Vienna. The military governor of Vienna has forbidden the papers hereafter to publish the names of any persons that may be arrested, or to mention the fact of their arrest, on the ground that it “interferes with judicial proceedings.” The government, it is said, has notified the English government, that measures will be taken to prevent Englishmen from traveling in Austria, if Austrian refugees continue to be received and fêted in England.—The financial embarrassments of the government still continue.—It is stated that Prince Schwarzenberg has avowed the intention of the Austrian government to sustain Louis Napoleon in the course he has taken—not that his legitimate right to the position he holds is conceded, but because he is acting on the side of order.

From SPAIN we have intelligence that the Queen has pardoned all the American prisoners proceeding from the last expedition against Cuba, whether in Spain fulfilling their sentence or still in Cuba. The decree announcing this was dated Dec. 9, and alleged the satisfactory conduct and assurances of the American government as the ground of this clemency.—The Spanish Minister, Don Calderon de la Barca, had been honored with the Grand Cross of Charles II. as a reward for his conduct, and Señor Laborde, the Spanish Consul at New Orleans, was to resume his post.—Immediately after receiving news of the _coup-d’état_ in Paris, the Spanish Congress was indefinitely prorogued by the royal authority. A princess was born on the 20th of December.

In TURKEY the question of Russian predominance has again been raised, by the demand of the French, upon the Turkish government, for the control of the Holy Sepulchre, which, they allege, was guaranteed to them by treaty in 1740. Through the agency of their Minister, the French had succeeded in procuring an admission of the binding force of the treaty: but just then the Russian Minister presented a demand that the Holy Sepulchre should still remain in the hands of the Greek Church. This remonstrance caused the Porte to hesitate: and the affair is still undecided.

From CHINA and the EAST news a month later has been received. From Bombay intelligence is to Nov. 17. A very severe hurricane occurred in and around Calcutta on the 22d of October, and caused great damage to the shipping as well as to houses: a great many persons were killed. Hostilities have again broken out between the English and the natives at Gwalior. Troops had been sent out upon service, but no engagements are reported.—In consequence of rival claimants to the throne, a fearful scene of anarchy and blood is commencing in Affghanistan. Many of the Hindoo traders and other peacable inhabitants have fled from the country, and were putting themselves under British protection.—An extensive fire occurred in Canton, Oct. 4, destroying five hundred houses and an immense amount of property. The intelligence of the Chinese rebellion was very vague, and the movement had ceased to excite interest or attract attention.

EDITOR’S TABLE.

The Value of the Union.—In our periodical rounds, we have arrived at the month which numbers in its calendar the natal day of Washington. What subject, then, more appropriate for such a period than the one we have placed at the head of our editorial Table? “_The Value of the Union_”—in other words, the value of our national Constitution? Who shall estimate it? By what mathematical formula shall we enter upon a computation requiring so many known and unknown forces to be taken into the account, and involving results so immense in the number and magnitude of their complications? No problem in astronomy or mechanics is to be compared with it. As a question of science, the whole solar system presents nothing more intricate. It is not a “problem of three bodies,” but of thirty; and these regarded not merely in their internal dynamical relations, but in their moral bearings upon an outer world of widely varied and varying forces.

In the computations of stocks and dividends, and the profit and loss of commercial partnerships, the process is comparatively clear. The balance is ever of one ascertained kind, and expressed in one uniform circulating medium. There is but one standard of value, and, therefore, the methods of ordinary arithmetic are sufficient. But in this estimate, which the most ordinary politician sometimes thinks himself perfectly competent to make, there enter elements that the highest analysis might fail to master. This is because the answer sought presents itself under so many aspects, and in such a variety of relations.

“_The Value of the Union._”—We have forgotten who first employed the ill-omened expression, but it has set us thinking in how many ways it may be taken, and how many different kinds of value may be supposed to enter into such a calculation.

And first—for our subject is so important as to require precision—we may attempt to consider the value of our national Constitution as A WORK OF ART. This is a choice term of the day—a favorite mode of speech with all who would affect a more than ordinary elevation of thought and sentiment. Profound ideas are sought in painting, statuary, and architecture. The ages, it is said, speak through them, and in them. The individual minds and hands by which they receive their outward forms, are only representative of deeper tendencies existing in the generic humanity. In the department of architecture, especially, some of the favorite writers of the age are analyzing the elements of its ideal excellence. The perfection of an architectural structure is its rhythm, its analogy, its inward harmonious support, its outward adaptedness to certain ends, or the expression of certain thoughts, or the giving form and embodiment to certain emotions—in other words, what may be called its artistic logic. Whether this be all true, or whether there is much cant and affectation mingled with it, still may we say that, in the best sense in which such an expression has ever been employed of statuary or architecture, is our Federal Constitution a high and glorious _work of art_; and if it had no other value, this alone would make it exceedingly precious in the eyes of all who have a taste for the sublimity and beauty of order, who love the just and true, and who regard the highest dignity and well-being of our humanity as consisting in a right appreciation of these ideas. One of the most popular and instructive works of the day is Ruskin on the different styles of architecture. Would it be thought whimsical to compare with this the Letters of Madison and Hamilton on the Federal Constitution? We refer to the well-known work entitled The Federalist, and on whose profound disquisitions the pillars of our government may be said to rest. Yes, _there_, we boldly affirm it, _there_, is to be found the true τὸ καλόν—there is architectural and constructive rhythm. There is analogy of ideas, there is harmony of adaptation, there is unity of power. There is both statistical and dynamical beauty—the beauty of rest, the beauty of strength in repose, the beauty of action in harmonious equilibrium. There is that which gives its highest charm to music, the perception of ratios, and ideas, and related chords, instead of mere unmeaning sounds. There is that which makes the enchantment of the picture, the exquisite blending of colors, the proper mingling of light and shade, the perspective adjustment of the near and the remote. There are all the elements of that high satisfaction we experience in the contemplation of any dramatic act, or of any structure, real or ideal, in which there is a perfect arrangement of mutually supporting parts, and a perfect resolution of mutually related forces, all combined with harmonious reference to a high and glorious end.

Irrespective, then, of its more immediate social and political utilities, there is a high value in our Federal Constitution when viewed thus in reference solely to its artistic excellence. We may thus speak of its worth _per se_, as a model of the τὸ καλόν, just as we would of that of a picture, or a temple, or an anthem. But even in this aspect it has its higher utilities. Is there no value in the elevating effect it must ever have upon those who have intellect enough to comprehend what we have called its artistic logic, and soul enough to feel the harmonizing influence of its artistic beauty? Will not a people reason better who have ever before them a work which has been the result of so much philosophical and scientific thought? Will not their moral taste be purified, and their love of the true and the beautiful be increased, in proportion as their minds enter truly into the harmony of such a structure? Is it a mere fancy to suppose that such a silent yet powerful educating influence in our Constitution may be more effectual, on many minds, than any direct restraining power of special statutes?

This train of thought is tempting, and suggests a great variety of illustrations, but we can not dwell on them. If the man who should maliciously cause the destruction of a splendid cathedral, who should set fire to St. Peter’s or St. Paul’s, or who should wantonly mar a master-piece of Power or Canova—if such a one, we say, would justly be visited with the execration of the civilized world, of how much sorer punishment should he be thought worthy who should traitorously conspire the death of our American Union, or even think of applying the torch to the glorious structure of our Federal Constitution? Even to speak lightly of its value should be regarded as no ordinary treason. But let us come down to what many would regard a more practical and utilitarian view of the matter.

AS AN EXAMPLE TO THE WORLD.—What arithmetic shall estimate the value of our Union and of our political institutions in this respect? This is the second element in our computation; although in view of the present condition of mankind it might even seem entitled to the first and highest place. Between the wild surgings of radicalism and the iron-bound coast of despotism, what hope for the nations if the fairest and strongest ship of constitutional liberty part her anchors, only to be engulfed in the yawning vortex on the one side, or dashed to pieces against the rocks on the other? When will the experiment ever be tried under fairer auspices? When may we again expect such a combination of favoring circumstances, propitious providences, moral and religious influences, formative ideas, and historical training as have all concurred in building up the fabric which some would so recklessly destroy? If after the preparation of centuries—if after all our claims to a higher Christianity, a higher civilization, a higher science—if after all our boasts of progress, and of the Press, and of the capacity of man for self-government—the result of it all should be a dissolution of our political and national existence before one generation of its founders had wholly passed away, what can we expect—we earnestly ask every serious reader deeply to ponder this most plain and practical question—what can we expect of the frivolous French infidelity, or the deeper, and therefore far more dangerous German pantheism, or the untaught serfdom of Austria and Russia? It may, perhaps, be said, that the mere dissolution of our Union would not involve any such eventful issue. It is only a temporary expedient (it might be maintained), not belonging to the essence of our nationality, and the real sovereignty, or sovereignties would not be impaired by its loss. Our State governments would remain, and other lesser confederacies might be formed, if political exigencies should require them. This suggests the _third aspect_ under which we would consider the problem that has presented itself for our editorial contemplations.

_The Value of our Union_ as THE KEY-STONE OF STATE AUTHORITY, and of all that may be legitimately included under the idea of State sovereignty. Who shall estimate it in this respect? We are too much inclined to regard our general government, as in some respects, a foreign one, as something outside of our proper nationality, as an external band, or wrapper, that may be loosened without much danger, rather than what it really is, or, at least has become in time, a _con-necting_, interweaving, all-pervading principle, constituting not merely a _sum_ of adjacent _parts_, but a _whole_ of organic _membership_; so that a severance would not leave merely disintegrated fractions, possessing each the same vitality it would have had, or might once have had, if there had never been such membership. The wound could not be inflicted without a deep, and, perhaps, deadly injury, not only to the life of the whole, as a whole, but to the vital forces through which the lower and smaller sections of each several member may have been respectively bound into political unities. It is true, our general government had a peculiar origin, and stands, _in time_, subsequent to the State authorities. It might seem, therefore, to some, to derive its life from them, instead of being itself a proper fountain of vitality. This is _chronologically_ true; but such an inference from it would be _logically_ false, and could only proceed from a very superficial study of the law of political organisms. Whatever may have been the origin of the parts, or the original circumstances of their union, we must now regard the body that has grown out of them as a living organic whole, which can not suffer without suffering throughout. It is _alive all over_, and you can put the amputating knife in no place without letting out some of the life-blood that flows in each member, and in every fibre of each member. It had, indeed, its origin in the union of the parts, but its vital principle has modified the parts, and modified their life, so that you can not now hurt it, or kill it, without producing universal pain and universal death. Nor was such union either arbitrary or accidental. Our general political organization was as naturally born out of the circumstances in which we were placed, as our several State polities grew out of the union of the feeble and varied sources in which they had their historical origin. The written Constitution declarative of the national coalescence (or _growing together_) only expressed an _effect_, instead of constituting a cause.

To change our metaphor, for the sake of varied and easy illustration, we may say, that the Federal Constitution, though last in the actual order of construction, has come to be the key-stone of the whole arch. It can not now be taken out but at the risk of every portion crumbling into atoms. The State interest may have been predominant in the earlier periods, but generations have since been born under the security of this arch, and a conservative feeling of nationality has been growing up with it. In this way our general government, our State governments, our county or district governments, our city corporations, the municipal authorities of our towns and villages, have become _cemented_ together into one grand harmonious whole, whose coherence is the coherence of every part, and in which no part is the same it would, or might have been, had no such interdependent coherence ever taken place. It becomes, therefore, a question of the most serious moment—What would be the effect of loosening this key of the arch? Could we expect any stone to keep its place, be it great or small? In other words, have we any reason to believe that such an event would be succeeded by two, or three, or a few confederacies, still bound together, or might we not rather expect a universal dissolution of our grand national system?