The daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1863-1864, 1863-11-04
THE ] DAILY REGISTER
WEDNESDAY. :. 80, -. NOVEMBER A, 1868
For the Register. r fn,..--
unconditional Union Men.

,sl lists and as such have ever been opposed
the Union as, fit was formed by our ia
theirs. Since it, according to their view
:, was the great defender and conservator {
slavery, and as this "was the sum Of al
o viIlainies," they poor souls) could not in
/, conscience bsfriend any such an oppressiv
a compact. This was their logic. And thei
r stereotyped declaration that the Constitu
, tion that gave existence and conference tt
the Union twas covenant with death ant
and an agreement with help is we'll known
to every one. These fanatics were wont Il
stigmatize all conservatives who, at the be
ginning of our troubles, made efforts to stay
the rupture of the States and the effusion o.
bloed, as NUnion savers" "doughfaces,
slavery propagandists," and even as men
willing to be tied to dead body already in
the first stages of dissolution!
The fact is, if their spoken and written
4 utteranees can be believed they not only
hated, but despiSed in their very hearts
that Union that spread the agis of defense
over social institution, that they loathed
and were leagued to destroy. Looking upon
the Union as the friend OF slavery, ihey des-
pised the former because of the latter
Their denunciations against it, were many
and bitter. The pulpit as well as the press,
was eloquent in fanatcal anathemas against
the federation of the North with the sinful
South in the evils Of oppression, as seen and
| felt in the federal Union. The free States,
| it was agreed were "props' to poisoning
Upas, which, if once removed the "accursed
thing would soon fall Of itself in conse-
ouence of its own inherent weakness; and
thus pass away. -.
SILT was the writer's privilege twenty FIVE
years ago to debate frequently both publicly
and privately with rien who were then re-
garded as 'iabolitionists," but who were
not whit more 80 then than many are
now who, claim to be simon pure "loyalists,"
and who feel greatly offended when ranked
as radicals, debate, We say, with these
against the dissolution Of the Union; and
some of these very men now are boasting
of their intense Union feelings, and brand
ing their old opponents, and all democrats
as "Copperheads, j." and disloyal to this Gov
eminent! How is this? Have both par
ties changed positions? Not at all How
can these, then, who once wished and argu-
ed for dissolution of the Union, now put
themselves forth as its most ardent suppor
tiers, and denounce all of its old and un
changed advocates as its enemies! The
answer is simply this These eriginafpiot-
ters against the government are deceivers
wolves in sleeps clothing. They fancy
the statuS Of civil affairs has so changed
that they may safely cry, "Union," ""Union'
that is, par, aoar the result OF which
must be las they imagne) either the total
extinction of slavery IN the Union, or such
a separation of the slave States from the
free as will accord with their long cherished
dogmas and desires; so that in either case
their end will be accomplished. Now, this
is actually the sum total of their loyalty
and Unionism. And now let every unpre
JUDGED reader ask himself if it is ust or
gentemanly in such political Jesults to
call old democrats disloyallsts, and set
themselves up to be the only true Union
men, when their -fedged patriotism
is of character so fimsey and fasoE
Truly they are shabby set of PATRIOTS
Is it not astonishing, too that 50 many Old
Wings who say they are now moderate
Republicans, and who once proiessed to de
plore the delusions and dangers of Aboll-
tionism, do now join chorus with these orig
inal despisers of our Constitution and Gov
ernment, in their self adulations of "loyal-
ty," and in their fippant denunciaton of
DEMOCRATS for disloyalty? Why is this
Can they not see that the charge is not
true? No democratic writer, orator, lead
er, or convention, since the commencement
of the war, has ever uttered or offered
word in favor of the dissolution OF tho
Union or to the disparagement of the Gov
ment. True they said, las they had the
right to say) things by way OF honest crlti-
cism against the present administrator,
Just as the Republicans did (and had the
right to do against the administration OF
James Buchanan. Is man, or party, or
a paper "disloyal" because it does this? 1t
so. then all men and parties are disloya,
because all men and parties have at times
denounced, in the strongest terms, or, at
least, disapproved of the doings and policy
of every congress and administra tlon from
Washington to Lincoln.
There never was a more unfounded and
nreposterous assumption than that now ad-
yanced BY many, that the present admins
tration is so pure and lntallible as to pre-
i clude all criticism, and so identical
with the government that dis-friendship
to it is disloyalty to the other How the
long suout of Folly ever smelt out such va
carries and grubbed them from the dirt
Seems almost beyond mortal ken. But SC
it is. That the old, rotten, abolition radl
Gals of the Phillips and Garrison schoo
should SO teach and denounce, might not
, indeed be wonderful, inasmuch as they are
men of no correct principle, and woult
therefore do anything however corrupt o
inconsistent to gain an end. But how wise
intelligent, and would-be-thought conserva
tive Republicans can believe, say, teach an
do such palpable absurdities is more ,ha
strange, it is amusing
We are Democrats We have long love
. and labored for the good OF this Govern
Z, ment. w expect to love and labor for
as long as ~c clive-giys our time. Our proI
-, 1;f, o,,r oil if noad he for lts we