Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-09-29

from any man north of Mason and Dixons line.
= We do not believe in resisting any Sc
cession movement ia the least.-NODem6eT Is,
1860
Again:
OF what value will an Union be that needs
links of bavonets and bullets to hold il togetherT
What better off shall we be with South Carolina
in the Union than out of it, if she is to tester
with the wounds inflicted by our hands, ehafe
with the memory of defeat and degradation, and
seek the first opportunity of revenger Is fam
ily better off with a member in it who has to be
watched perpetually to keep him from firing the
house? We say no. Common sense and human
ty saw no. If any State WILL 60 from Us, let It
60 The price OF retaining it, II II to be PAID
in blood Is far gre ter than the worth of it when
We have got it. We are, therefore, clearly OF the
opinion that any attempt to resist by force the
secession of any State, or combination of States,
from the Union, would be unwise and calamitous
in the last degree 1t is better to preserve lives
and all of frieadliness we can with seeding re-
lations than TO preserve the Constitution at cost
of war-NoUembeT 10, 1860.
Again:
As to the seeding States, we say
Let them 60 out" We can not keep them in
this Union, though We conquer them, and IL Is
better to have them friends out of the family
than enemies in it-Dec. Z, 1860.
Again:
An alliance between the two sections NAV ex
ist. bu; never an union. This philosophy oil
secession. then, in our judgment, justihes US IN
advocating the peaceable departure of the Gun
States.-Dec. IL, 1860.
Again:
South Carolina has seeded. Well, we
a divided house
And we are none the worse for it. All the mis-
chief that the apprehension of disunon could do
has been done, and disuniOn itself can do nothing
if we do not force it to. We are well rid OIL
Sonth Carolina, if we are only wise enough &c
count it a radiance and nothing worse. II
other States follow, let them. If all the South
| follows, let it. In Gods name, and fOi
humanitys sake, let them go in peace.-Dec. %
1862
Again:
! Secession is revolution. We. having estab
lshed our Government by revolution, on the right
/ of a people at any time to change Government
which is oppressive to them, cannot deny tina
right to those who deliberately declare our Gov
eminent is oppressive. What we claimed as Ou
right we cannot deny to those who claim it o
US, and helped us to assert our claim at the out
set.-Nop. %, 1860.
/ Again:
/ 1t was best Ito let South Carolina go) because
our Declaration of Independence recognizes thu
right of people to change their Government
because if retained by force she would not be
member of the Union; because it subjugated sh'
would be more troublesome than if released; be
cause, in short war could not maintain The
Union. and anything but the Union would not b,
worth maintaining ut all.-Fe6. 3, 1861.
permitted we could give many other instances o
similar character, the Journal has the impu
dcnce to assert that all it believed or said il
favor of letting the rebel States go was, that i
would come to the Union and ask permission t,
leave, thus acknowledging the right of the UniOl
to hold them if deemed wise to do so, it, for one
would vote to give them permission, rather thai
begin a war to keep them in And this to-
after South Carolina had gone lrithout permission
it took the position that it was best to let SOut
Carolina go, because our Declaration of indie
pendence recognizes the right of a people t
change their government! And these are tn
views which the Journal says commend them
selves to the practical good sense of the country
If the Journal was not engaged in a conspirac
to dissolve the Union, at the time it was arguing
in favor of peaceable dissolution of the Union
what motive had it in advocating that policy
Could it have been anything else than to PerPet
uate the control of the Government in the hand
of the Republican party? To gain that end
was willing to sacrifice the Union.