Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1862-09-10
The Terms of Peace.

| The Richmond Enquirer says, we are informed
that a late copy of the New York Times has been
received that says" If the combined armies of Nc
Clellan, Burnside and Pope defeated, then we
| for one are for a settlement" We have not seen
the paper, and do not know whether or not any
qualifications were added. Those who informed US
of the Times expression, added that the whole tone
of the article was that of disappointment and sor-
| row. Whether or not this statement is correct we
| have no doubt that thousands at the North, who
heretofore silently submitted to the popular cry
will now speak out and demand peace, since all their
armies have been defeated and force ntervenes be
tween victorious army and the Northern cities
The Enquirer then says:
"1he only terms which the Confederate States
cept will be the immediate recognition OF the present Con-
derate States and the permission to the other States to
elect their destiny and to decide whether their future
shall be with the Confederate States with the United
States"
In this we entirely concur with the Enquirer
Maryland, Missouri, and Kentucky must be per-
mitted, by both governments, to vote at the ballot
box and determine where they will go; and in or
der to ensure fair expression Of opinion the armies
of both governments should be withdrawn. We
have fears to the determination of these States
They will decide by large maoritIes to unite their
destinies with the Confederate States.
But the Enquirer adds:
"We are of the opinion that the principle of election
should be applied not only to the border Slave States but
to each and all of the remaining United States Not that
any of the Northern States wanted in the Conederacy
but acknowledgment of the right of Secession-fO
which this war has been waged The peace which ends
this should acknowledge the ends for which il
fought and apply its principles to each and all of the Uni
ted States"
In this we do not concur with the Enquirer; and
we regret that that journal should have, uttered
views calculated to alarm and discourage the people
of the South. In the first place, this war has not
been waged for the purpose of obtaining a recogn-
ton the hands of the Northern people of the right
of secession; and in the second place. proposition
to continue the war until the Northern States shall
agree, by the votes of their people, to recognize the
right Of secession will inevitably lead to endless
conflict 1t is matter of no importance to US, so
we obtain our independence, what the Northern
States think of the right Of secession, whether
they recognize it or not What we want is inde-
pendence-not the recognition of abstract PROPOSE.
tions, as to which our own people even are divided
So far as the border States concerned this war
has been fought against coercion, and against un-
constitutional aggression their soil and their lib
critics by the Northern government 1t is as much
a war for independence by them, it is by the So
called cotton States The former seeded for cause
and the latter at will The Confederate States them
selves differ to the right Of secession, or rather
as to its nature and this being So it is not reason
able to expect that the Northern States can ever
be brought to recognize the right especially that
right is understood and claimed by the cotton States
RI RrAuRrCAPn-This ahla General in whom the