, 1862-05-15
IGbG:, ,:Gtibunf.
!: THURSDAY, ;; MAY: 1b, 1859.


!. ~ THURSDAY, :hfA:E 1863
4 AvERY PLAIN NATTER, Il
On the eleventh day Of February, 1861,
thh House Of Representatives passed . reeo-
lu1ion, n tlsat neither the Federal Govern
81 meat nor the people Or governments Of
nshe non-slavehoMing States have pur-
" pose or constitutional right to legiklate
t' upon or Interfere with slavery in any OF
II the States of the Union-" It is tow
claimed by tile leading men Of pro slavery
Factions, that, ifthis resolution had not been
r7assed. the border States would have Sc
cc1ed, and that it WAS in the nature OF q
perpetual pledge, and is still binding in its
whele force. Now there was an implied
and distinct obligation On the other side, q
failure 70 comply with which, should can
rd thu resolution There WIS an under |
aanding that the slaye States should accept
1t, and that they should remain justas loyal
as the free States. Any other condition
vouldbe absurd. The idea that the reso-
luton was unconditional, inrolvesa con-
tradic,ion- And Whist slave State accepted
The proposition? Eleven seeded Ihree
were held in the Union by armed interfer-
rnce. Delaware Yves uncondiuonally loyal.
rrhc roen1utou accomplished nothing, save
that it stripped the rebels Of the poor e1-
cnse If interference with slavery.
Three Border States eoted themselves
loya1. Fuur rebel States did the same.
Tennessee could have been saved for less
tlan it cost to saye Kentucky; Virginia
tor less than Missouri cost; North Carolina
or Arkansas for less than Maryland. The
resolution Of Congress saved no State It
vas still-born. 1t never took effect It
was simply rejected proposition. Sup
nose two men have & dispute about the
possession Of property; that the one makes
a liberal offer; that the Other pays no heed
to It, but appeals to The law; that the case
is decided against 1>im-can he set aside
the verdict Of the court, and hold the de-
fepdant TO his previous offer? Just the
same principle il involved in the case Of
the protfered resolution. The rebels ap-
pealed to the sword. The verdict has been
against them. And low political pett6og-
gers claim that Congress is bound by its
rejected proposition!
The Chicago TINES says the're5olution
awas in the nature Of a solemn pledge,
fa1sencss to which now is the lower deep
Of infamy;;" and that Congress has no right
to interfere with slavery in any State, be-
xr 1ar rha
cd. But the Constitution gives power to Con
gress, in time Of war, invasion, or insurrec.
tion, to interfere With anything which may
stand in the way Of the public safety Of
welfare. The Government may, at such {
time as this, interfere with life and liberty
Is slavery more sacred than both? L
slavery superior to the people Of this csun
Try?
An historical reniniscene may throw
some light on the flower deep of infany
matter. On the twentieth of October, 1774
the Continental Congress adopted the Art
clcs of Association. The preamble begin
thus: tsWe, his maiesty's loyal subjects, til
"deIegates Of the several Colonies, \
ssaeosoing our anegianee to his uaajes:y ou
ssafecticn and regard for our fellow-su1
"jec.s in Great Britain and elsewhere, etc
Here was solemn pledge Of allegiance, u
qualified by any expressed reservation
Language could not be stronger. But tt
protest Of allegiance, like the recent pr,
test against intended non-iaterferene
with slavery, met with no kindly respons
Both were like pearls cast before swim
Great changes crowded upon each othe
Armies were raised, cities taken, batt1
fought. The Continental Congress ke]
pace with the march Of events. On Il
9Th Of July, 177776, it passed the Declaratie
Of Independence, in which occurs su,
language IS this: "Thc history Of Il
present King Of Great Britain is histo
Of repcated injuries and tssurpations,
having, in direct object, the ostabhshrnc
Of an absolute tyranny oyer these State
"a prince, who
character is thus marked By eDery ast schl
mag define tyrant, is unfit to be the rul
Of free people," Twenty-eight charg
of corruption, tyrnnny, barbaTity, and b
faith, many Of them renching back beyol
1774, are brought against him. And t
people Of Great Britain are deliberate
told that they shall be held as & the rest
mankind-eneulies in war; in pea
fficnds.'' Was the Declaration of Ins
pendcnce slower deep Of infamy 7" Il
it "a violation Of the "solemn PLEDGE
I. H.,
slavery in the rebel States, By our GoTel
ment, be violation Of the rejected prof.
sition OF 1861?
The Tory was the " conservative N
Of the Revolutionary period. He stood
the platform Of It'll He insisted that
was " solemn pledge Of allegiance, a
that the Declaration was slower deep
infa1ny." He would neither move forws
nor back. But by thus standing still,
became an enemy Of his country, and
memory has ever since been infamo
To stand still at such q time as the pres
would be suicidal, No free governn1
can stand still and live 1t would be I
stopping the circulation Of blood In
human system. 1--WE wait till every II
approves our course, We shall never mt
at all. The second Declaration Of In
pendeucc, if passed now, would be 10 N
violently opposed than the first
STRENGTH IN WAR,
Cruel and bloody as war Is. 1t yet teac
needed lessons, and throws bright Ii
on great truths. Il brings opinion to
test Of trial; it confronts assertion y
fact; it challenges pride and boastin!