The daily Green Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1861-1865, 1862-12-15

Now, We suppose Mr.. Lord believes that the
rebellion is atrocious aud causeless, and that those
who are maintaining it are committing the gravest
offence known to the laws of any country Yet
one would seek in vain for the expression Of any
such sentiment in the sermon. They would,
rather, find an apology for the sin of the South,
the crafty Ahithophels" being introduced as
scape goats upon which the guilt of the people
was to be carried away, in season for that GLORIOUS
bridal" with what John Van Buren, is pleased to
call our hayward sisters" And at the same
moment the sinful Norh-spoken of by MIR.
Lord in the same strain of condemnation which he
uses in re5uking the rebelsis to have its sins put
upon the political Joabs" against whom the ire
of the King Of the land is to kindle the same as
against the leaders Of the rebellion.
And here We may add that we arc not entirely
certain of being right in our inference respecting
Mr.. Lords meaning, in the figure he introduces
Joab, we believe, vas the leader of King David 5
army, and doubtless trusted and honored coun-
sellor of the King Of Israel. Ahithophel was
the counsellor Of Absalom, although his counsel
was not always taken, land also the counsellor OF
David. AT first We thought that tn, leaders and
councillors most trusted by Mr.. Lincoln were in
troduced as Joabs," and those mos. trusted by
Jeff Davis, as" Ahithophels." 1t is possible, how
ever, inasmueh as Ahthophel's counsel was reject
ed in the final, fatal moment by Absalom, that
Mr.. Lord meant under this figure to make sly
thrust at Buchanan, Fernando Wood, and the
Democratic lit clans generally. On the whole,
however, We are inclined to reject this irterpreta-
ton, and to receive the text as we at first under
stood it.
Now, perhaps Mr.. Lord will pardon US for
adopting bis interrogatiye style of argument for
a moment. Is the North equally criminal with
the South in the guilt of the rebellion? Is there
any law, civil, moral or divine. which justiGes in
the slightest degree the treason that is now styi-
king at the government Is it advisable for the
government to resort to other than forc.0le meth
DDS to put down rebellion Is it wise, expedent or
Christian to attempt to placate rebels by any de-
parturefrom the policy which the government is
pursuing toward the rebellion ? Should the con-
hscaon measures passed by the last session of Con.
gress be repealed? Ought the Presidents emanci-
patton proclamation to be treated as though never
issued ? Should any terms be offered the rebels
while they stand in arms against the government
except unconditional and unqualified submission
Is there anything for the government to do but
to fight the war through, or slbmit to d!Snonor-
able peace, or a divided country Is it wrong
Or partisan for minister to take sides in this con-
troversy between the government and its enemies,
to be for the government Internationally, or
against the rebellion Internationally? Is it par
partisan or unchlistian to commend our troops,
praise their bravery and eulogise their devotion
to country unless we in the same breath also COM
mend rebel soldiers and mourn over dead traitors,
as we mourn over our own children slain by traitor
hands May not the wrath Of the King OF the
"a ID kindle against rebels, while it warns with
unspeakable love and admiration toward the milk
ion loyal men who are unfolding the banner O
the Republic Did King Dlvid-in Mr.. Lords
fgure-mourn for any Of the 10000 rebels slain
except his son Absalom Did he give his Cap
tans charge to deal gently with any other enemy f?
And was not the death of Absalom, although con-
trary to Davd's wish, one means OF bringing ck
the people who had ben led as;raya
But we have pursued this subject far enough.
Our objection to Mr. Lords sermon was, that, so
far as it was political at all, it advocated doctrines
supported at present by no considerable body of
people but those acting with the Democratic
party and that it had no word Of commentator
for the supporters Of the Government, except such
a. it also had for those who were striving to up
turn it. We do not understand Mr. Lords note
to deny this Interpretation, but rather to give