high seats of national authority, did not want peace. In a notable speech on the state of the Union in March, 1864, he charged that these destructionists " invoked the storm which had rained blood upon the land. They courted the whirlwind. They danced with hellish glee around the bubbling caldron of civil war. They welcomed with ferocious joy every hurtful mischief which flickered in its lurid and infernal flame. No Confederate oratory exceeded the vehemence with which the "War Power party " was assailed by members of Congress who saw the peril of liberty amidst the fierce strife between the sections. The press also ventured to assail the ultraists in an occasional exercise of its guaranteed freedom, notwithstanding frequent suppressions by military orders.
In fact, the general situation through the first half of 1864 was exceedingly favorable to the institution of a policy which it would seem, in the light now shining on that eventful period, might have stopped the " carnage and havoc and re-introduced all States without dishonor of any into the enjoyment of " a more perfect union," than that from which they sought separation. The circumstances grew more and more auspicious even amidst the great battles between Lee and Grant until they culminated in July. Taking a view of the situation on the Fourth day of July, 1864, that day sacred to the patriot ism of the whole country, it is seen that it might have been set apart for a conference between Grant, Sherman, Farragut, and Sheridan on behalf of the Northern army and navy, and Lee, Johnston, Buchanan and Forrest on behalf of the South. At that time Grant had reached the suburbs of Richmond but had paused to institute his siege. Sherman had passed Kenesaw mountain, and was on the northern side of the Chattahoochee. The blockade was practically effective along the entire Confederate coast, and the Western as well as the Trans- Mississippi States were debatable ground. Mr. Lincoln s proclama-
