The daily Green Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1861-1865, 1862-05-10
Conservatism and Radicalssm.

Some old writer has defined Il conservative to
he one who will not look upon the new moon
cut of his regard for the ancient and venerable
Institution, The old Onr Although the point of
this definition lies somewhat in tsexaggerAtion,
there 10 yet enough OF trath in it to give
the sarcasm force. There il Il class of writer's
aud politicians, wh0 take TO themselves with
much seli-complacency the designation Of con
servallyes, WHO have no better claim to il than
would the man who blindly worships the old
moon and tnrns away III pious horror from the
new. And just now we hear great deal about
conservatives nnd radicals conservative repub-
licans, and radical republicans, conservative dem
0crats, anu radical democrats, and conservative
generals and radical generals, and efforts are
being made necessarily to convince the public
that the conservative element in all these is
the only safe oHe Tor tie country in its present
troubles. i}u1 as this conservatism is q variable
quantity, hardly Two, who arrogAte to them
selves that title, agreeing IS to the precise way
20 save the country it ISL quite fair fox them TO
draw the llr9 and shut anybody GA as radical.
Ii lacc, tn5iI conservatism consists in lust what
1t IS convenient lor them to-day to advocate,
Whether that ,orn - strictly applicable to it or
not, just as the Old democratic party baptized
al OF Their party measures with the saving and
popular namo, Democracy. We are one day
told that Senators Wilson, Sumner, and Hale
are radicals by che doubtfuily veracious cores.
pondent Of the doubtfully loyal New York Her.
aid, and the next day the same correspondent
announces the vote to refer al the confscation
bills before the Senate to select committee. as
triumph Of the conservatives yet Senators
Sumner, Hale, and Wilson voted for this refer
ence. But wel the Herald, and its correspon-
dents and lnltators, there is one test which de-
termlnes the question viz Every person who
hates Slavery, and desires that the country NAV
be nd OF it, is u radical, while those who are
defending the institution are conservatives. We
are sorry to see good word, one that in its
true Specification is well enough, made to do
service in 50 bad cause and we still more
regret to see those who really dislike slavery.
misied by u name into holstering up an in
stitution which they know to be u positive and
constant evil to the country
Now we hold that the true conservatism in
the Craftsmanship OF our time, is to preserve
our free Republican institutions, and, not only.
to preserve them for today, but to preserve
them for all coming time. We do not regard
slavery as one of our free institutions, and 50
we do not suppose that slavery must necxssurilv
be conserved in order to save the Republic
1t physician were called to q patient suffer- |
ing with the deArimm tremens we should not
consider him radical, in any bad sense Of that
word. 1t he should suggest that intoxicating
liquors brought the patient to his delirium, and
that, in order 10 preserve him, they should be
kept from him. The treatment would be rad- |
cal, IN the sense of going to the root of the dis
ease, but it would be conservative, we think. |
tor all that. And 80 we do not consider it" rad. |
lcal . IN any obnoxious sense, or anti" coneery-
atlve, to intimate now that Slavery has |
brought the country into It's present peril, and |
that the less we have of Slavery hereafter the |
less likely shall we be to have IL repetition of |
rebellion like the one we are now suppressing
lie must BIO indeed dull scholar, or precisely |
such conservative us answers the definition
given at the outset Of this article, who has OF