Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1861-01-31

lgratt0n Is WESTWARD, wnere there Is yet
world to be settled and colonized. Let
us then have Union, for if we but keep
together as nation we shall be instrument
tai ingiving freedom to numberless nations
yet unborn. IS s7eGcisslmmee isiog e oi
lIk zz11l1---- -. -~.--- lGE L-fEl I
I .nsm noio stating the Case. ssigx9
The following article. which we copy
| from the Indiana Journal. expresses our
own views. SO exactly, and with SO much
more clearness and forcc than we could
wore we to try, that we have concluded to
substitute it for the remarks we design
ed making on the subject. that our position
i in regard to. coereing seccding States may
not be misapprchendca: adi i'sasdi so
The Knightstown Guardian. now edited
by the able and indefatigable MORGAN, and
the Shelbyville Bonner. always judicious
and moderate, discuss the views we have
heretofore urged in regard. to the expedi-
cncy OF rcsorting to force to maintain an
union with the extreme slave States, with
such courtesy of tone. and such evident
desire to be right instead of being merely
victorious in a friendly passage at arms,
that we are impellei to reply. Dut we
should first premise that our views have
been ably seconded by the Marshall Re
publican in a recent article. by the Attica
Ledger. the Richmond Broad Are. and we
believe some three, or four other true Re-
publican papers, whose fidelity to the good
cause will not be questioned, however their
opinions may be disputed. We think that
a full comparison of views will show that
we do not differ widely from any Of our
Republican friends. Certainly we do not
as regards the policy dictated by the pre-
sent position of the difficulty. We shall
therefore make our reply a re-statement of
onr position. rather than an examination
Of the acute and discriminating objections
Of our friends.
When the dissatisfaction in the extreme
South began to assume the portentious
magnitude now universally seen in it, We
said it woull be wiser. if those States re-
qucstcd a separation, anil refused to abide
in the Union without such concessions as
would destroy the very life of the Govera-
ment, to consent to their departure than to
attempt to retain them by force. a civil
war could only embitter bitterness already
intense. and however It might result could
not restore real and effective un;on As
su9jugated provinces those States would
be perpetual source of trouble in peace.
and OF weakness In war, expensive to keep
in subsection. AMI useless in any condition.
Coercion" therefore. appeared to MS a
wasfefnl experiment, the failure Of which
could be foresccn from the beginning. But
BY consultation of the whole Marion it
might be agreed that certain members
should be allowed to part from us. and
yet the Government be left whole and
strong over those that remained. We new
or meant or said that they sheuld Lc al
lowed to 60 out at their own pleasure. and
IN their own way. The alternative stood
thus; useless civil war on one side, separa-
tion agreed to by all parties on the other.
We preferred the latter
AT the very outset we made it an indis-
pensable condition Of the separation, that
1t should be consented to by tn nation, and
obtained by full and irsliscussion of
-
the matter. not only among the people Of
the dissatisfied States, but Of all the rest.
Our Government, in the very lowest view
OF 1t. in that adop,e by the secessionists
themselves. is partnership. from which
no one partner can retire at will. embarrass-
ing the business. unsettling the credit. and
obstructing the duties Of the others. Hence
consent was fundamental condition Of the
policy we advocated. But in the hurry Of
daily duties. and the confusion of widely
varied labors. We frequently discussed the
warlike aspect Of the case without recall
ing this condition. taking it for granted
that it would be kept in mini. and consc-
quently. to many who had not seen or had
forgotten IT. we appeared to advocate the
policy OF giving away to secession anyhow,
no matter how it presented itself. This
'se neser nseanf, or scould hare mainfaincd
for a moment. The question, as we appre-
hended it. was this: "Will il not be bet
ter to agree to the separation Of States
whose secession doctrines are at war with
the stability of the Government and whose
pretensions are perpetually embroiling and
embarrassing the nation. than to make war
upon them. when a war can at the most
only conquer them. and can never really
restore them to the Union?" We believed.
and still believe that the answer required
by enlightened policy. by Christian duty,
and by all the considerations that should
govern great, enlightened and humane
people. is Eyes" We believed and still
believe. that the true province of govern
ment Is not more to preserve itself, than
to adapt itself to the demands of the gov
erned. and that war to maintain one gov
ernment over those who believe that they
would be better off under another. is nm.
wise. cruel. and. in Americans. inconsist.
ent - zotis4tt-es 5fs ~ Tr''Tl-'-''-'
Bat while we held It our duty to con-
sent when asked. ws Reid Il equally The az.
fy Of dissatiyfsd Stafes to ask consent. If
they disregarded this duty they relieved MS
of ours. Consequently if they attempted
to break down the government in order to
be released from it. we are justified in re-
sisting them by force. We necd our gov
ernmcnt. Il is the best ever framed. and
we cannot permit its destruction by any
body. under any pretext. Hence, when
South Carolina, and the Gulf States, in.
stead Of taking steps to ascertain the wish