ase) on the subject of slavery.' He then inserts the whole
act in the note, only to hold it up to censure--'testing it by
international law' as interpreted by him. At page 605 he denounces
that law as 'obnoxious not only to the principles of international
law, but to the Constitution of the United States.' His note and
extracts, including long extracts from speeches of Thomas, of
Massachusetts, and Crittenden, of Kentucky, fill more than
twenty-two pages--reserving a line or two of text at the top. To
say nothing of the sentiments, such notes are a shameful abuse of
the reputation and work of Mr. Wheaton, and a perversion of the
duties and rights of an editor. But a word of the sentiments. He
exhausts himself and the records of the past in accumulating
precedents to condemn the policy of freeing slaves as a war
measure, or of arming them in the nation's defence.

'At page 614, in this same note, speaking of the effect of the
Proclamation of Emancipation, he says: 'The attention of publicists
may well be called to the withdrawal of the four millions of men
from the cultivation of cotton, which, is the source of wealth of
the great commercial and manufacturing nations of Europe.' That is,
he suggests this as a ground for interference in our affairs on the
principles of _his_ international law. He further adds that this
cultivation of cotton is 'by nature a virtual monopoly of the
seceded States;' that is, nature preordained the negroes to be
slaves in the seceded States to raise cotton; and hence natural and
international law require emancipation proclamations to be put
down. Did Stephens ever go farther? Again, on the same page, he
says: 'The effect on the United States, _in the event of the
reestablishment of the Federal authority,_' without the
Proclamation in force, etc., 'would be _seriously felt_, in its
financial bearings,' etc.--'abroad as well as at home.' Not
satisfied, therefore, with suggesting a justification of
intervention, on the basis of international law, he appeals to the
cupidity of foreigners as well as natives, by hinting also that
financial ruin may follow the triumph of Freedom and the Federal
armies. What a shame that an American editor should use the great
name of Wheaton to give dignity to such suggestions in foreign
c