Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1853-10-27
OCTOBER 81, 1853
INDEPENDENT SUPPORTING TREA-
SON TO PARTY.

mind, that any man who presumes to differ
upon any question with the President, elected
by his party, is prepared for party treason and
desertion. Such view has been gravely taken
respecting Gov. Dickinson, Of New York, and
the !! section with which he is acting.
Such an idea is not only absurd in reality,
but is productive Of consequences disastrous
to liberty and to the true interests Of the party.
Its, absurdity consists in this. 1t is utterly
impossible for mass of men TO agree upon
every mooted question, even where they concur
in the general principles applicable to them.
A difference of opinion, in some respects, be-
tween members of the same party, agreeing
upon essentials, is therefore inevitable. To de-
clare that the expression of that difference by
a citizen, in reference to the policy OF the
President or any other representative of the
party, is reasonable and inadmisible, is to
make the concealment Of private opinion a
party duty, and hypocrisy a party virtue. In
free country, where none are so low as to lose
the right of criticism upon public action, and
4one so high as to be beyond its reach, free In
quiry, and free speech, not only desirable, but
60 essential, that he who objects to them may
be ranked among the dogmatists of exploded
.Jogaedom, an enemy to progress and foe to
republican institutions. Muzzle the citizen by
legislative enactment or by party drill, and the
Constitution dies under the form of law-or
civil liberty perishes under the despotism Of
partyl
How absurd, then, to argue because cit-
zen differs and frankly expresses the difference
which he feels, from his party in power, upon
one point--and that not fundamental-tha he
intends to change his whole political creed! Men
who have no sincere opinions may do so; but
why should such men as these, whose political
purity has been tested by years of fidelity in
adversely and prosperity, and who now are
ranked among the .hards Of New York, be
suspected and pointed at as preparing for trea-
son and desertion because they cannot sustain
nomination tainted, as they believe, with free
solism; nomination obtained through con-
vention under the intimidation Of violence and
controlled by the leaders of rebellion in 1913?
But absurd as is the proposition, it is still
more hateful because adrerse to liberty.
Tie King can do no wrong-is the exploded
dogma of monarchical creed. A President
can do no wrong-nor any ofhis cabinets the
dogma of party in country protesting to be
free It is true, the citizen who expresses an
honest difference of opinion from the executive
is not tried and condemned under the solemn
forms of law. But it is so much the worse.
The penalty is the more severe, because in
Hicted by hands unrestrained by legal obliga-
tons, and is measured only by the charity Of
licentious partizans, who hope to earn their
ing as treason that independence Of thought
and speech which can look power in the face,
and neither cower-oringe-nor fawn! The
bloodhounds of faction start in pursuit of the
insolent freeman-and hunted down by their
untiring pursuit his punishment is made to
consist in prescription from all honors or posi-
tons of trust, which his talents and character
entitle him to expect from the hands Of his
party.
Such is modern party despotism; despot-
of government, but one whose presence is
known from the handwriting on the wall by
some unseen, and perhaps irresponsible scrib-
bler-by the utter destruction of political aspi
rations and deprivation ofparty confidence
Is this system not hostile to liberty of speech
of thought-and Of action? What has made
"the powers that be" the sole-the infallible
opponents of principle? Who has subjected
private opinion to the unlimited control of their
decision? Can man only be right when he
thinks with the President? Must a man be
always wrong who differs from him?
We do not mean to say that all differences of
opinion are to go unnoticed in party action.
We mean only to controvert the bad sentiment,
that any difference from President is a ground
OF suspicion, and should be marked as the be-
ginning Of treason. We love to see indepen-
dence; such as fears no man--and bows to no
power, but that of God. Such independence
should be encouraged, not denounced should
be admired, not censured.
We believe breaches, serious breaches, in a
party are made by such cause as that we OBJ
pose. Denunciation excites passion; passion
e1aggerates differences and differences too
much magniGed become insuperable obstacles
TO cordial communion between members of a
party. Let differences, small or great, even in
party, arise, be discussed and pass away. If
that party, as the democratic party is, and
should be, is based upon a fundamental princi
pie, which takes hold upon the Constitution as
the guide to all government action, it cannot
be divided by such differences, and viii be
stronger because Of them. Men viii love the
party which leaves them free and encourages
their independence, as they will hate that which
discourages liberty Of thought, stiles indepen-
dence of feeling, and denounces freedom Of
speech.
We think we may answer the SUSPICIOUS.