Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-02-01
The Constifufion Repudiated.

ne JOuTudt
1--WE contend for the Constitution. The nation
is fighting for that and that only All other Oh
jects of the war are decisions"
Not 20, sirsi The nation is fighting for life.
us o,cn life--and Is determined 20 live though all
the paper Constitutions on earth be scattered TO
the winds True. the Constitution does not rec
ognize slaves as property. so that YOU would gain
little by the concession of your premises but we
insist that the Constitution shall not fetter loyal
Is. vet protect treason. Constitutions are changed
every wear: but the American Republic is undv.
ing. Ii will vet rise triumphant over red handed
traitors aud all their pettfoggng quibbling abet-
tors. Live the Republicl-TTiJHne.
This Is, the Tribune's reply to our remarks in
defense OF the Constitution. The reputation of
the Constitution and law is distinct enough Ii
Is plsiIl but it l. as disoyaI as Jefferson Davis's
last message Ii is not strange that the Journal
Of Commerce and the Tribune differ so much in
Their views Of the guarantees OF the Constitution.
We hold. with Mr.. Lincoln and with the body of
the people, that the Constitution l. the Republic.
the Union. the Nation We now understand
what Live the Republic" in the mouth OF a rad
zeal means. The Tribune tells US IL does not
mean the Union. the Constitution, the Nation
founded by the fathers But it means what ii did
in tae days of the French revolution. when uire
In toi was forgotten ia the mad shout piUe Ia re-
publi1uc. No Constitution for US is the doctrine
OF the Tribune; no law For usl Constitutions are
rags, worn ont in a tweivemonth and hit only to
he sold, given away or thrown into the street. 1t
is not a year since the Tribune had flaming
head line motto The Constitution as ii is; no
compromise" &c, &c. To-day Constitutions
are different affair. We suppose our cotempo-
rary understands the taste of his readers They
pay their money and they have their choice
We had an object in the remarks we made in
reply the 7ribuue's assertion that the Constitu
ton vas dead letter as to all rights of rebels,
but did not expect to obtain il so suddenly
I That paper hIS never been imperviOus Ia reason,
but while feeling lis force, usually avoids the ad
mission. In the present instance, however. the
entire effect of argument IS AT once reached.
i That paper admits tie position not IN direct
words, but no less fully and seeks Justification
of its course in the doctrine that the is not
/ for the Union, but is war of ideas, or some
/ thing of the sort.
+ liz is clearly impossible for any one 20 maintain
/ the radical doctrine that the obligations OF the
\ Constitution are at an end. and vet be loyal
/ supporter of the American Union. The Tribune
does well 10 abandon the attempt The Const-
/ tuition is the Union. The sounding words about
/ fighting for ife-the life of the natioll-if they
/ had any meaning in the lips of those who use
them would mean fighting for the Constitution
/ That, and that alone is the life of the Republic
/ That gone the Republic is dead But il has not
/ that Specification in the view of these writers
who call the defenders of the Constitution "pet
/ tifogging. quibbling abettors" OF treason alud-
/ ing probably to the President who is a LAWYER
and a firm devotee TO the Constitution.
! Quoth these gentlemen, mot so, Sirs; we are
not fighting for the Constitution" Ii would be
agreeable it would render the labor of conserva-
tive considerably lighter, if the radical par
ty would remain firm on this position We would
engage to let them alone till doomsday il thew
would not preted to be loyal, and their doOms-
day would come swiftly. with the restored power
of the old Republic Only the day previous, the
Tribune said, What is our civil war aboutl II
IS about The right Of property IN s!ares" For
twenty four hours this was what we were fighting
about according to these leaders of the people
To-day il Is for "the life of the nation to-mor-
row. it will he for some new vagarv of these I'M
stable, unsettled minds-but never openly, nOblv.
LOYALTY for the Constitution. Only last Monday,
reported as saving. None of NV officers
the Tribune berated General Buell. who
shall attempt 20 tell the people what the war is
about l. myself do not know what il is about.
only know that it Is my duty to whip the enc
nv" Whereupon they remaI ked :-''It does not
seem creditable to any man or common sense and
patriotism. let alone General commanding a
hundred thousand men, not to know what the
war is about II General Buell. ever made the
remark. We should strongly suspect he was
reader Of the Tribune and was bothered by the
various and conflicting Instructions given therein.
We have here the last resort Of radicasm
Their organ i frank about it, and boldly attacks
the Constitution. It's provisions are too strong
for their notions of the times
But why not drop the practice Of calling the
Southerners rebels and traitors or why not adopt
the name for themselves Rebels against what?
Ii there Is no Constitution. what do thew rebel
against or % what are they traitOrsi If the radi
cal Abolitionists agree with them in considerin 2
the Constitution thing OF wear. paper 20 be
changed or disregarle1 at will We do not see
why they not precisely the same SORT ofrebels
thit Seeessionists IRE The fact j.. our cotem
porary has no solid principles, and is adrift in
trouhlouS times This blind attempt To lead
those that are not blind can not but he regarded
as Il bold pretence bur lamentable failure.-N.
Y Jour. Of Cam