Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1863-12-18
Very Strange.


The Ohio Statesman is very strange
paper. Just after the late election in this
State and in the midst Of the depressing
,afects which always follow defeats, but be-
fore the election in New York, it opened
up furious and unprovoked attack upon
Mr. VALLANDIGHAM' peculiar views"
which it declared to be "folly to dignity
with the name of principles" Itdeclared
: further that his "posce" speech of January,
1868, was "tbe beginning of our troubles"
and directly and oracularly pronounced
that his nomination was grave error
and the cause of our defeat. The aRimWs
of the article and of several more like it
about the same time, was plain. MIR. v.
was supposed to be down, and perhaps
like FALsTAFF, 'out Of breath" Colonel
MANYpENNY did not like Mr.. ", and now
was good time to impress upon the
Democracy that if they would succeed
they must "let him slide," and commit no
more ''grave errors" in Convention. This
was magnanimous at time when MIR.
VALLAspIGHAM was in exile, suffering loss
of suffrage and citizenship besides person
al wrong, because of his devotion to the
principles of liberty and Democracy.
A month later, the Statesman, appre-
hending that Mr.. VALLANDIoHAM might
some day return home and be received by
the Democracy of Ohio as one of them
selves and still entitled to their confidence
for the people are not apt to forsake a
man who suffers in their cause-under-
took to prove by quotations from that
same "peace' speech of Mr.. " in January
1868, that his views as to the war, were
identical with its own, Speaking Of the
WAR, he had said
~ meant that without opposition, the
President might take all the money he should
demand, and then TO hold him to a strict &C
countability before the people for the results.
This position the Salesman declared
to be its own. With what face, then
could it have proclaimed on the Both o
( October, that we lost the State by nomi
+ mating Mr.. V. and on account of his posi-
tion as to the war ?
And now again on the 18th Of thi
month, the Statesman rings in another
fling at Mr.. VALLANDIGHAM'S "peculial
views" saying, 1--WE were probably al
much opposed to Mr. VS. peculiar view
as our correspondent" What does al
I. this mean?
But, plainly, is it not time that paper
( calling themselves Democratic, which hav
occasion to refer to 1lr. V. at all, shoul,
cease this ssnseless stuff about his "pecu
liar views" all put forth to keep up tn
notion that he entertains certain opinion
,difterent from the mass of the Democracy
and which excludes him from the pale o
Z the party? AS his friends, representing hin
here in his own home and while absent, W
say that his "views" are not peculiar D
These relate to two points ong,
I. He believes that wsr--'ceerolon"--
rill never restore the Union. And 80 did
very American Statesman Of every par
4, from the beginning OF the government
,wn to April 10. 1861. So did tn
iole Democratic party. So said JACK
y. So said DoUoLAs. SO said 18th
hundred thousand Democrats o
TO-" in January 1861. Very strange
a, that this ''view" OF Mr.. VALLAN
lam should be continually sneered a
apeculiar." ,
As to men and money. Mr.. V. he'll
at, breaking out of the war, that as
reEsentative, he ought not to vote agains
arms and supplies; that the Presider
shoa take what he might demand, bein
held ,spOnsible for the results but th'
meanime, an appeal should be made
the people, and the whole question
peace aad war be fully and freely discuss