Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-08-31

AH
On the 2s.h of November, 1861. there appear
ed in the Indianapolis Journal a letter from
ROBERr DALE OwES upon The question of CO.
ercion.r Il .oeca2iea thc lcsding place in that
paper We have NOT room to reproduce il entire,
but make a few extracts 10 show now decided
that gentleman was at that time against the sub
jagatiou Of States or the policy OF attempting to
maintAin the union Of the States. as IL had
existed. by force. Referring to the demands of
South Carolina as a condition of remaining in
the Union, Mr. Owen remarks:
III think that the North. on sober second
thought. will reflect that ii the Constitution con
tsins certain clauses which crate on her feelings,
still il is not only the supreme law Of The land,
but the best which the wit OF man has yet de-
vised for human government and, so rejecting.
that she will repeal the obnoxious statutes in
question. / think, too that she may accede to
other concessions, as, an agreement that fugitive
slaves shall be paid for. in cases of non rendition
But / feel that she never will. as / ara sure she
never ought, recognize the carrying of slavery
anywhereby implication"
Then referring to the contingency that South
Carolina might secede, if her demands are not
complied with, Mr.. OWN says:
ave have the legal right, then, to coerce.
But all things 1--WE are told on the highest au-
thority.) which are lawful for US are not there
fore expedient.
Our fellow citizens, now the inhabitants of
the South. had nothing to do with The introduc-
ton. within its boundaries, of slavery. II we
had been born to the sam circumstances as they
we should probably have thought and felt in
regard to slavery as they do. 1t is equally un-
christian and unphilosophical in US to denounce
them as criminals because they are shareholders.
In so doing we are neither fair in principle or
g~uiltless of having famed the fame Of sectional
hatred that RACES around US now"
After counseling the exercise of a Christian
spirit in considering the then impending troubles
Of the country, Mr.. OWEN thus argues:
violence breeds violence. We may deter
mine. in advance, when we are commencing, that
it shall only go to a certain point, and no fur
Their But the dogs of war. once let slip. escape
beyond our control. We may call them back in
vain.
By coercion what do we propose 10 ourselves?
To convince? The srord nerer eonuinces; it
subjects. Is it our purpose to subject. if we can
not convince our fellow citizens of South Caro-
linaf But Il is utterly at variance Nth the spirit
of our Government 10 .haUe, in Gur midst. sub
jects kept loyal By force. And if it was not, South
Carolina. il she lack judgment, has spirit and
courage; too much spirit and too much courage
to submit to the degradation. A political creed
cannot. any more than a religious one, be thrust
upon brave men bv force.
In certain cases numbers suffice to coufer con
sideration. When numbers combine for an un-
lawful object, the offense changes It's character.
That which, in six men. is robbery, becomes war
fare in sixty thousand. The difference between
rebellion and revolution lies chiefly in numbers
Had Washington struck for liberty and indie
~pendence at the head of fifty followers only, and
had he and his men been captured, they might,
without ouiraging civihz ttiOn, have been hanged
as rebels. But with Washington at the head of
fifty thousand. the British Government felt con-
strained 10 regard their colonial prisoners as any
other captives taken in war; and to allow them
the mercy, which, in such cases, the law Of
nations prescribeS.
Sister States discovered is n grave misfortune,
but sister States belligerent would be a deadly
curse. The baptism of blood con
fers on national enmities a terrible perpetuity.
What, then, is to be done7 Shall we
employ toward South Carolina urgency and en-
treatyH There is neither dignity nor use in en-
treaty beyond a certain point. What remains?
Let US act toward her in that spirit which is gen
tie and easy to be entreated: but if zoe can not
eonUiRce her, LET her GO IL PEACE. Thus going,
she may some day, as did one of old, return to
the parental home. In any event, we shall gain
an ally if we lose a sister"
Such were the views expressed by ROBERT
DALE OWEN, and they were reiterated upon vari-
Gus occasions subsequently,. in carefully consid
cred and elaborate addresses.
The opinions of Mr.. OWEN and his views of
public policy. as given in the letter from which
we have quoted, were endorsed by the Journal,
the central organ of the Republican party of
Indiana. Be it remembered this was after the
election of Mr. LINCOLN in 1860, and when the
Republican party by the election of that year
were soon to come into the possession of the
national Government. Here is what the Journal
said in approval of the sentiments of Mr.. OWEN:
ut will be seen that his view is substantially
that urged by us on several occasions. c
He maintains that though secession is unconsti
tutionalI if il be deliberately and unitedly resolved
upon by a State, the dictate Of Christian kindness,
no less than Of political lcisdOrn, is 10 let her 90 in
peace So say Ue We do not concede that any
State has reached that point OF un4nimity and
determination which would make coercion i'm
possible or improper in the view We maintain,
though Mr.. Owen assumes that South Carolina
has done so, and argues the case as an actual
instead OF a hypothetical exigency. But that
point being conceded, and the tact fully accepted
on al hands, that one State or more has calmly
and ixedly resolved that she can not remain in
the Union without injury or dishonor, a state of
afflirs is conceded in which coercion would be Mt
once cruel and useless. Cruel. because il would
spill b.ood to make an enemy OF a State that might
otherwise prefer 10 remain friendly, though not
in the same family; aud useless, because
when accomplished, the Union is Just rs effectu
ally broken as If the conquered State had left us
We deem it superluous TO argue that n popular
government can never be preserved by force. The
act of compulsion changes il to a despotismso far
as the parties afflicted by it are concerned. Its
DO government of theirs any longer. and despot
ism is simply a government that the governed
don't create Consequently if coercion" pre-
serves the body, il surely destroys the life Of this
great popular government. 1t secures US a
Union without unity, an aggregation OF States
without sympathy. And il doesno more. Wheth
er that is worth purchasing at the fearful price o.
a civil war, it is hardly worth while to argue to
sensible men. y . Secession is rgpoiu-
ton. We having establishe our government by
revolution, on the right of a people at any time
to change a government which ia oppressive
to them, cannot deny that right to those
who deliberately declare our Government op
pressive. VIVA; we claimed as our right we can.
not deny to those who claim it of us, and helped
us TO assert our claim ut the outset. They may
be mistaken. In our judgment they are fatally
mistaken. but we cannot Judge for them whether
the Federal Government il too oppressive for en-
durance any more than England could judge for
us"
But enough. We have quoted the deliberate
ly expressed views Of Mr.. OwEs and the Journal
upon the questions OF coercion and secession,
They were uttered before violence had com
menced or the "dogs Of war" were let slip be