The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1860-04-05
The Canvass ira Connecticut
--EOIRR COrWIn and Henry
.. lane.

The canvass which has been and is now in pro-
gress in Connecticut, possesses peculiar char
acterStics. The Democratic candidate for Gov
ernor. Col Thomas II Seymor, is not only an ac-
complished civilian but ne served his country
with distinguished bravery and ability. An ex-
change in referring to it, remarks:
"The battle-cry for Seymour in Connecticut is
Forward, the Ninth The origin of this is in
consequence of his having promptly taken com
mand of Col Ransoms detachment, at the battle
of Chepultapec, when Col Ransom fel-and with
the utterance of that command, pressing on, amid
the hottest of the fight, and planting the Amer-
ran flag on the walls of the fortress
The principal spokesman upon the Republican
side i'll Connecticut, is one Tom Corwin, who bit
terly and vehemently opposed the Mexican cam
paign. even going so far as to express his sympa-
Thy with enemies OF his country in that contest
hndhe continues to show the anmus which then
influenced him by now opposing one of the men
who volunteered TO defend and vndicate the hon
or and glory of his country. The same man who
was leader in the opposition ranks during the
Maxican war, is now leader and claims to be the
father of Republican pafiv.
The enquiry here naturally suggests ITSELF is the
man whom the Republicans have sent to Connec-
ucut AS the representative and advocate of their
/ party. any more patriot now than when he SYM
/ pathlZed with the eneRsy whom were engaged in
a sangninary conflict? " no denounced COrwin
ana the party wish whom he acted as traitors to
! their country with more intcnseness when standing
upon the ehemy's soil, than Colonel Henry 5
Lane! lie felt then the dSh0nor and the disgrace
of the post OF Corwin 4 Co, and his patriotic
impulses, unreStraned By partisan influences or
reg ri for his own political advancement, led him
to place those men in the same category as the en-
envy he ieltithiS duty to fight. TWAS not only in
an enemy's country that Col Lane denounced the
home opposers of that war. He came back TO In
diane lmDued with the sames irit and sentiment
In response to welcome address from his fellow
citizens, he declared that when addressing his fell
low soldiers IN MeXicO-that he had nothing to
take back which he then uttered and that the faint
OF traltorlsm would forever follow Corwin and his
coadJutors to the grave. Why now this marvel
loua sympathy between COrwin, and Lane and the
| Republican party? Where the changer l. it an
Unsuitable desire fOl Office and the thirst Of power
| Has Lane become less patriotic or Corwin more
loyal 20 his country's honor? With these facts
staring them in the face, The people will think i.
strange to see Henry S Lane and Tom Corwin bed
fellows, check 10y jowl, upholding the same cause
appealing for the support of the very men who bit
Il few years ago, the gallant Col Lane denounced
with all his burning cl0quence and whitening re
buke as traitors to their country.
Where Is Col Lanes patriotism? Why is he
not standing up for the man-the patriot with
whom he WAS associated in the Mexican war;
Why does be rather sympathze with the "traitor'
Corwin2 Is Col Lane only a patriot when he
stands upon an encmy's soil? l. there only tina
he can donounce the traitors TO their country anc
when at home affiliate with them. Can he onl,
V Indicate the honor of his country when he stand
shoulder TO shoulder with the stout hearts who are
ready to shed their blood in her cause ?-[ State
Sentinel