Newspaper Page Text
2
the countryman.
TURNWOLD, GA., JULY 7, 1863.
Gen. Toombs in Hancock.
No. 1.
When we gave a synoptical report of the
speech of Gen. Toombs in Hancock, in our
issue before the last, we did not intend it
should go out in our columns with a
mere annunciation that it was ottr misfor
tune to disagree with the honorable
speaker in many things. We intend
ed that we would, in some subsequent is
sue, give our own views somewhat at length,
and state some of the points of difference
between the conclusions of Gen. Toombs
and those of our own mind.
Imputing to the speaker nothing but the
purest motives, as we did, and do, yet we
must say that we fear that his criticisms
upon the course of the government, and its
settled policy, are likely to beget discon
tent and mistrust in the minds of our peo
ple which will not enure to our benefit in
the struggle in which we are engaged.
With reference to the Conscription Act,
we must admit that its operation, in many ca
ses, is hard, unjust, and cruel. But the Al
mighty himself has never enacted a law,
wihcb, so far as our finite minds can judge
of its operation, is not, in some cases,
harsh, and cruel. We say that so far as
we can judge, from what is immediately
before us, this is so. But take the laws of
the Almighty with reference to eternity,
and eternal things, and all those laws are
not only in harmony among themselves;
but in concord with justice, mercy, equity,
and goodness—productive of happiness to
all God’s creatures. The economy of the
Almighty is to legard all things as a
whole—
“All are parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body nature is, and God the soul ”—
and to enact laws with reference to all time
—the universe—eternity. And in the
end, even the apparent victims of his
laws are made recipients of their mercy
and benignity. The greatest immediate
good to the greatest number, and the great
est quantity, in his whole creation, is God’s
law, without reference to temporary incon
venience to exceptional cases.
Th6 laws of man are perfect in propor
tion as they approach this standard of the
laws of God. But as it is not in God ? s
plan that any one of his laws (we care not
which one it is) should so immediately op
erate, in all cases, as to be apparenly free
from rigor and cruelty, much more is it so
with reference to all man's. And these re
marks are applicable to Gen. Toombs's ob
jections to the Conscription Act, the Tax
Act,Endorsement of Confederate Bonds,and
Martial Law, though we made them first
with reference to t,lie Conscription Act alone,
to which we now return.
We have admitted that this Act is, in
many instances, harsh, and cruel. But the
war itself, which created the necessity for
this Act, is very harsh and very cruel.
The severance of the old Union, to which
Gen. Toombs, in his proximate action, con
tributed so much, was, and is, in many re
spects as to its results, very harsh, and
very cruel. And yet we believe that both
the war and the dissolution were unavoida
ble, and will be, in their ultimate conse
quences, very beneficial, though fearfully
disastrous in their first stages.
Conscription we conceive to have been
necessary for the general good—the great
est ultimate happiness of the greatest num
ber, to be produced by what was absolute
ly necessary—immediate action. And it
is an argument of no force against it that
we freely admit that, in its immediate op
eration, and in exceptional cases, it is very
harsh, and very cruel.
We do not propose to go into any gen
eral discussion of the Conscription Act. We
have not time, nor space, nor necessity,
just now, to do so. But we believe it was
the best policy that, could have been adopt
ed, and that it was the salvation of the
country.
We are not prepared to say that as our
governments (State and Confederate) are,
we would not have preferred to see the
call for troops made through the States,
if it could have been as promptly, and as
efficiently done. But our cause could not
have waited for the operation cf so much
machinery, particularly with some of the
authorities of the States jealous of their
brief personal prerogative—not only punc
tilious, but factious. And here is one of
the grand defects of our dual system of
government—State and Confederate. We,
for one, are tired of being the subject, or
the citizen of two governments. We do
not wish to have two sovereigns—Gov.
Brown and President Davis, for instance—
claiming our allegiance. One might Lang
us for treason to him, and if we had two
necks, and two lives, the other might hang
us for treason to him. And we suppose it
we had the third neck and life, Lincoln
would not be satisfied until he sacrificed
them to the offended majesty of his omnip
otent sovereignty, if he could only secure
the opportunity.
We fear that we can never have efficien
cy, promptness, and energy, as long as we
have two governments. For our individ
ual self, we want a State government in
full, or we want a Central government in
full. We are not prepared, now, to say
which we believe to be better—much less
which we believe to be the more practicable
of attainment.
We return : As our dual government
is, perhaps it would have been better to
call upon the States for troops, than for
the Central government to conscribe them,
provided it could have been done as prompt
ly and as efficiently. At any rate, it would
have been more in accordance with the
genius and spirit of our many-headed form
of government. But we needed the troops,
and we needed them immediately—without
a moment’s delay. Conscription was re
sorted to, and the result is before the coun
try.
The number of troops actually con-
scribed in any State, besides the 12-months
men which conscription kept in the service,
is not a fail test of efficiency of the Con
scription Act. We must take into consid
eration the number of soldiers whom this
Act induced to volunteer in preference to
being conscribed.
But after all, Gen. Toombs holds the
Conscription Act to be unconstitutional,
because he counts the conscripts the mili
tia, and the constitution reserves the offi
cering of the militia to the States. This
is a point of State rights, and we would
remark that some of the most punctilious,
if not factious, State rights men, hold the
Conscription Act to be constitutional—forin-
stance, Wm. L. Yancey, and others.
But the conscripts are not the militia, as
such. The Confederate government, un
der our constitution, has power “ to raise
armies.” This may be done, 1st, by en
listing men into the regular army ; 2nd, by
accepting volunteers’; 3rd, by conscribing,
or drafting in some form or other ; 4th, by
calling out the militia in a body. When
men enlist or volunteer immediately into
the Service of the Central government,
would any one hold that because the en
listed men, oi volunteers, when out of such
service, were militia men, therefore the
State government retained the right to of
ficer them ? Not by any means. Is it
true that they have no right to volunteer,
or enlist, because they are militia men 1
No one believes so. Then, if one militia
man has the right to become a volunteer
or enlisted man, a million have the same
right, and the whole body of militia may,
as individuals, volunteer or enlist. Here
the whole body of the militia would be in
the service of the Central government—