Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1863-04-09
o...,, Speech of
HON. LEWIS b. GUNCKEL,

HON. LEWIS b. GUNCKEL,
I'D. OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY,
Delivered tn the Senate Of Ohio, March "a,
1893, ON the Resolutions OF Mr.. Welsh
IN Favor OF the Union. ....
Mr.. PRESIDENT: We have had two days
Of discussion costing the State hundreds of
dollars. We have had hours of learned
argument. hours of bitter
partisan controversy, hours devoted to angry
and violent denunciatiou Of our National
and State Administrations--and upon phatf
Let US 20 back and see Three simple reso-
lutions in favor OF the Union: one renew.
ing our pledges, ip the name Of the people
of Ohio, to the General Government, to
render it all the aid within our power, in its
laudable efforts to put down the rebellion,
preserve the Constitution and restore the
Union" and the two, "solemnly protesting
against any division Of the loyal States,
with the ultimate design of attaching any
portion of those States to the so called
Southern Confederacy." Is there anything
in these Resolutions to which loyal man
could object2 Anything with which a
Democrat, who processes to be In favor of
the Constitution as ii is and the Union as
it was" can find fault .......,--.y
Why then all this discussion, all this Bit
ter invective2 have listened for two days,
with the most careful attention, to the
speeches Of the learned Senators on the
opposition, with view Of ascertaining, and
have been able to gather but two points
Ffrst, That the war with all its terrible
evil might have been prevented, if at the
proper time, certain concessions had been
made and certain compromises permitted by
the Republican or Union party.
Second, That after the war was com.
menced, the Democratic party would have
continued to support the Administration,
had it not demonstrated that its purpose
was no longer to suppress the rebellion. but
in violation of the Constitution, to abolish
slavery
l propose to examine these points
WHO Is RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAR.
First, Was it possible for the Admins
tration party to have prevented this war
Are Republicans to blame for its inaugura.
ton Is it really Lincoln war; ian
Abolition war;" as charged by the Demo
cratic orators and editors? find an an.
swer in the Crittenden Resolutions, about
which Senators have spoken so much and
so eloquently. The Senator from Perry
embodied it in resolutions he offered last
winter, and we are told that it expresses the
doctrines of the Democratic party on the
subject of the war. The Crittenden Rcso
luton says (and quote the exact langu
age: HHt Hetrrt'a s' ltH tlIai
That the present deplorabe civil war has been force,
upon the country by the dlsalioniss o: The Sou,herl
nt nd IA, urtna ur mad tha nil
Mark the language that the present
deporable civil war has been forced upor
the country"-not by the Republican par
ty, not by Lincoln or his administi alton, no
even by the Abolitionists Of the North, bu
'BY THE DIsUNIONIsrs OF THE SOUTH
ERN STATES Could proof be stronger o
more conclusiveP
But it is alleged that this might have beer
avoided, ii at an earlier day, the Republi
cans had favored the Crittenden amend
ment. Would its adoption have appeasec
the South-prevented secession? If so
why did Southern Senators refuse to vot,
for il? Why did Keitt Of South Carolina
telegraph to his own State, "We can ge
the Crittenden Compromise, but we will
have no compromise ?" Why did Yancey
in Dec, 1861, use the following language
mo protlered compromise, no amend
ments to the Constitution, no additions
guarantees, can delay her 1.-THE South's
action for Independence one moment. Their
is no defect in the fundamental law-there
fore, it needs no alteration y Afterward
Yancey, in connection with Rust and ManI
as commissioners from the Confederat
States, to Great Britain, 10 u formal CON
munication made by them to lord Russo
used this language 1T was from no ted
that the slaves would be liberated, tn,
secession took place. The very party
power had proposed to guarantee SLAYER
forever in the States, if tie South woul
but remain in the Union" aiii .
d Do you want further proof? / will Civ
it to you, and from authority you dare n
dispute. read from Stephen A. Dougla
and il is one of the last OF bis public ute
ances H thi
srhers never has been time, from the day Il
Washingten was inaugurated first President OF the
United States when the rights OF the Southern Stat
stood rmer under the laws OF the land tha they do no
there never was time when they had not as good ca
for disnnion as they have to-day I
slavery question s a mere pre,ext. The election
Lincoln mere excuse. The present secession mo,
meni 10 the result Of an conspiracy formed
aders ia the Southern Confcderacy, than twel
months ago" .at .,
Douglas ought to be good authority
Democrats--he used to be, am sure.
" good authority, then have l clearly prov
a that slavery was a Dere prctext, that,
d concession, no compromise on the part
. the North could have prevented secessio
and as a consequence, war, with all its u
Tribe incidents.
4 Mr.. FrNcK will the Senator allow I
ljust here to read from Mr.. Douglas on Il
point: NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. .4.llo, ....,
q "If you Of the Republican side not willing TO-
cept this nor The proposition Of the Senator IRON
lucky, Mr Critienden pray tell me what you are
Ing 10 do Iaidress the inquiry 10 the hepuolici
alone for the reaso that 10 the committee OF thirteci
few days agolevery member from the Sotdh niclud
those IRON the Cotton States lMcssrs. Toombs and
their readiness TO accept the proposition
my venerable friend from Kentucky, 1Mr. Crtlenden
final settlement Of lhs controversy. II rendered
sustained by the Republican members. Herce the
responsibility of mcnt and the only dici
Al inihr way or an aanicabie aduztmsnt is with the
q publican party," ,iis % sos .,iD taaf 5ea
i. Mr.. GUNCKEb-Thoss words were us
in the excitement of heated debate In /
= Senate, and at time, when he may ha
considered Davis and Toombs worthy
belief--he found out his mistake but /
soon afterward, Besides Davis did |
n Il Beem anxious, ct that time, for separate
n but whatever his own views were, be q
not speak for WisfAl, Benjamin, Bid
and other Senators, who, slthough in th
: seats at the time, refused to vote for I
sOrittendep Compromise, aud 70 helped
fdacaat II nnuoias Alter Ward said wha