wly raised her eyes. At first, as before,
with the same studied expression of pleading humility; but, as she
glanced forward, and saw Sergius standing behind, and gazing at her with
an admiration which he did not attempt to dissemble, a strange glow of
triumph and ambitious hope seemed to light up her features. And when,
after a hasty glance of almost responsive meaning toward Sergius, she
again looked into the face of the other, it was no longer with an
assumption of humble entreaty, but rather with an expression of wild,
searching intensity. Before it the milder gaze of AEnone faltered, until
it seemed as though the two had suffered a relative interchange of
position: the patrician mistress standing with troubled features, and
with vague apprehension and trembling in her heart, and as though
timorously asking for the friendship which she had meant to bestow; and
the captive, calmly, and with a look of ill-suppressed triumph, reading
the other's soul as though to learn how she could most readily wield
supremacy over her.

'OUR DOMESTIC RELATIONS; OR, HOW TO TREAT THE REBEL STATES.'

In the _Atlantic Monthly_ for October, 1863, is an article with the
above caption, in which the author, we think, develops ideas and
theories totally at variance with the spirit of our Government, and
which, if acted upon, and followed to their legitimate results, tend to
subvert that self-government which is the privilege and pride of the
American citizen. The result of his reflection is, that the States
which, more conveniently than accurately, are termed the rebel States,
have practically become Territories, and as such are to be governed by
Congress. Is this proposition true? Let us examine--not hastily, not
rashly, not vindictively, or in a party spirit--but wisely,
magnanimously, and lovingly, and see if there be not a truer conclusion
and one more in accordance with the spirit of our republican
Constitution.

When the rebel _States_ (?) passed their respective ordinances of
secession, what results flowed from the action? The political doctrine
that the union of the States is not a mere confederation of separate
States, but a consolidation, within the limits of the Constitution, of
the different States, otherwise independent, into _one nation_, is now
too well established to remain a subject of debate. We are not,
therefore, members of a confederacy, but are a unit--one. It follows, as
a matter of course, that no State can