opinions, were imprisoned on military orders although charged with no offense, and were denied the privilege of examination before a civil magistrate.  A Vermont farmer, too outspoken in his criticism of the government, found himself behind the bars until the government, in its good pleasure, saw fit to release him.  These measures were not confined to the theater of war nor to the border states where the spirit of secession was strong enough to endanger the cause of union.  They were applied all through the Northern states up to the very boundaries of Canada.  Zeal for the national cause, too often supplemented by a zeal for persecution, spread terror among those who wavered in the singleness of their devotion to the union.

These drastic operations on the part of military authorities, so foreign to the normal course of civilized life, naturally aroused intense and bitter hostility.  Meetings of protest were held throughout the country.  Thirty-six members of the House of Representatives sought to put on record their condemnation of the suspension of the habeas corpus act, only to meet a firm denial by the supporters of the act.  Chief Justice Taney, before whom the case of a man arrested under the President’s military authority was brought, emphatically declared, in a long and learned opinion bristling with historical examples, that the President had no power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus.  In Congress and out, Democrats, abolitionists, and champions of civil liberty denounced Lincoln and his Cabinet in unsparing terms.  Vallandigham, a Democratic leader of Ohio, afterward banished to the South for his opposition to the war, constantly applied to Lincoln the epithet of “Caesar.”  Wendell Phillips saw in him “a more unlimited despot than the world knows this side of China.”

Sensitive to such stinging thrusts and no friend of wanton persecution, Lincoln attempted to mitigate the rigors of the law by paroling many political prisoners.  The general policy, however, he defended in homely language, very different in tone and meaning from the involved reasoning of the lawyers.  “Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of the wily agitator who induces him to desert?” he asked in a quiet way of some spokesmen for those who protested against arresting people for “talking against the war.”  This summed up his philosophy.  He was engaged in a war to save the union, and all measures necessary and proper to accomplish that purpose were warranted by the Constitution which he had sworn to uphold.

=Military Strategy—­North and South.=—­The broad outlines of military strategy followed by the commanders of the opposing forces are clear even to the layman who cannot be expected to master the details of a campaign or, for that matter, the maneuvers of a single great battle.  The problem for the South was one of defense mainly, though even for defense swift and paralyzing strokes at the North were later deemed imperative measures.  The problem of the North was, to put it baldly, one of invasion and conquest.  Southern territory had to be invaded and Southern armies beaten on their own ground or worn down to exhaustion there.