The Results of Emancipation and Arming the Negroes.
The New York Times, a leading supporter of the administration, condemns the policy of Cameron, in regard to the slaves in the seceded states, and says:
"If congress should decree the emancipation of the slaves, and incorporate the blacks of the south with the army that is fighting against rebellion, we should probably witness the following events in substantially the following order:
1. The annihilation of the Union party and of the Union armies in Missouri, Kentucky, Western Virginia and Maryland — and the secession of those states from the Union.
2. The resignation of a very large proportion of the Union generals, and the disbandment of more than half the existing Union armies now in the field — with the cessation of enlistments, and the impossibilty of supplying fresh troops.
3. The formation of a peace party in the northern states which would resist and defeat the collection of war taxes, paralyze the prosecution and confusion here at home, and secure either the recognized independence of the south, or the reconstruction of the Union by giving slavery all the guarantees it has ever dreamed of asking."
What sane man can doubt that, in the Union, such would be the result, should abolitionism secure its radical demands in the present congress? We are of those who believe that the ultra leaders of that party seek such action by congress that permanent discussion may follow. They would so conduct the government and the war as to forbid all hope of re-union. They are working to this end, or they are fools rather than knaves. But they are not former, but traitors and disunionists, who would have "no Union with slaveholders," and who seek to destroy what they hypocritically profess to be so zealous in battling for. Their emancipation and arming project is one of the means which they adopt to break what they have termed "a covenant with hell." The Times graphically depicts the result of their labors should congress adopt their insidious policy.