Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-02-02

The Journal is very much alarmed over some
resolutions presented to the Senate by Messrs.
WOLFE and BRowN. 1t says of the latter: This
measure, if passed, will take our State out of the
Union surely as an ordinance of secession. 1t
is an ordinance of secession. 1t meant to
be 4" Now what is the substance of the resolu-
tions of Senator BRowS2 They call for an
armstice and a Convention of all the States for
the adjustment of our National difficulties. A
request is made of Congress to call such Con-
ventcn, but in case of its failure to do so, the
people of every State of the Federal Union, in
GLIDING the so-called Confederate States, are in
vited to meet the delegates of Indiana in Con
vention at Nashville, on the LIST day of June,
1868, "with view to the restoration of
the Union, with all the dignity,
equality and rights of the several
and a majority of Congress refuse to call con-
vention of all the States to adjust our national
trout les, have not the people right to do sol
The Journals idea is that the Cabinet, ma
jority in Congress is the Government. We admit
no such doctrine. This is a Government of con
power The representatives of the people are
not the Government. The Constitution says,
I'VE, the people of the United States, do ordain
and establish" &c. But the Journal says it Is
firmly convinced that armistice and a national
convention, with view TO the restoration of the
Union, are measures Ito take Indiana out of the
Union" 1t pronounces it to be "pain, direct
secession" The editor of the Journal Is really
to be pitied for his alarm over Indiana being
thus taken out of the Union. A stranger
reading the article would suppose that the Journal
man expected to wake up some morning ere long.
and find the State, himself and all quietly float
ing down the Mississippi into Dixie. All this
comes from a paper that two years ago was advo-
eating a dissolution of the Union the best thing
that could happen for the North. The theory
then was that the right~Of revolution existed
when any State, any number of States, con
cluded that continuance in the Union was no
longer desirable, or that it was injurious to their
interests. 1t also declared that secession was
revolution, and that the secession of South Caro-
lima was a dissolution of the Union. 1t was in
favor of IA peaceable separation of the States
Lifting all the States that desired to leave the
Union go in peace 1t regarded civil war a
worse evil than the loss of dozen States, and
most decidedly opposed Union which could only
be held together by bayonets. If the journal
was honest in its expressions two years ago, it
certainly should not object to armistice, to the
stoppage of civil war which it said was "A worse
evil than the loss of "a dozen States, and the call
ing of convention to adjust our national troubles
with a view to the restoration of the Union. 1t
certainly cannot unless it is in favor of disso-
luton of the Union. That is the only ground
upon which it can consistently object to the reso-
lutions of MeSsrs. WOLFE and Brown, for the OBJ
ect of both of them is not to cake Indiana out
of the Union, but "to restore the Union with all
the dignity, equality and rights of the several
States unimpaired" We cannot see even a
squint mt secession in resolutions having such an
object in view, and no one object to them un-
less he is disunonist per Sc.