The mountain Democrat., 1863-03-21
Loyalty to the Goyernment.

|
eminent is recOncilable with hostility to
the minister who administers the Govern.
ment will read the whole Of that SEN
tence:
"Men boast their loyalty to the Con.
stitution and laws, but deny that they owe
allegiance to any man. Granted that allie.
glance is due to the Government under
which we live, but is there nothing due to
the agent who is the n -, A<Is<1e 0f the
unity, power and strength Of the Govern
mentf Is loyalty to the Government re-
concilablc with hostility to the minister
who administers the Government?"
The Senator virtually answers the ques-
ton. When you take into consideration
the whole text you will find that the Sen
ator clearly indicates that hostility to the
miBiSter is not reconcilable With loyalty
to the Government. That Is the plain
English Of the honorable Senator's asser-
ton. differ from the honorable Senator
upon that point. The world, ever since
struggles have been going on between the
executive power on the one hand, and the
Constitution aud civil rights and liberty of
the people on the other, has differed from
the Senator. History is full Of illustra-
tions and examples Of this kind. sup
pose that the honorable Senator thinks
that the iron Barons, when at Runnymede
they exacted the great charter from the
puSillanimous John, were not loyal to
their Government because they were hos
tile to the prince that ruled; but, sir, the
world has attcstcd otherwise. They were
baa N Ia iro ohn L. 4
ly; they struck successfully for the liber-
ties Of the people. Their object was to
rescue the liberties Of the British people
from the hand Of that usurping tyrant,
and they did it and the whole world from
that day to this has been filled with their
praise, except when they have been as,
saulted by despots and tyrants and their
minions.
There was party arrayed against the
executive power, and they manfully stood
their ground until they rescued the an
cicut liberties of the English people by
Tie cXaction Of the great charter from that
tyrant king; and il the Senator had lived
in that day, entertaining the sentiments
he now does, he would o! course have op-
posed the haronS and adhered TO the party
Of King John.
That is no; the oi..y i.lustrious cxam.le
IN The history Of our ancestors. In 1928
PIrliamcntdrnandvd thv petition: OF rights
from another Of the British Kings, who
was exercising and claiming power to
which he was not entitled. Under the
constitution and laws Of the British EN-
pIre they fcarl, s>ly and boldly demanded
the petition Of right Il, farther security
IF the liberty Ot the people. They got it.
And further; in 1858 there was another
struggle that resulted in driving an Eng
li,h king from the throne, the second
James and they demanded, before they
| allowed his successors, William and Mary,
to mount the throne, bill Of rights
These were struggles against those in
power Were those men di>loyal to their
country because Of the hostility shown to
the executive. to the minister? The Sen
ator, uo doubt, would pronounce them
iisioyai. The world has pronounced them
hostile to the prince, but loyal to the con.
! Stitution and laws Of their country, and
defenders of the rights and liberty of the
people.
~
cases where the people, or the representa-
lives Of the people, united against uSurp-
crS, against the executive power. Each
time glorious results followed in favor Of
constitutional and civil liberty. The world
is full OF illuStrious personal examples.
suppose the Senator would differ from the
. Whole world in the eulogv it has passed
upon John lIampdcn, upon AlgernOn sgd.
ney, and Russell, bold and daring friends
of civil liberty who, in their day and time,
struck against executive power. Sir, they
were hostile to the minister; they were
hostile to the king because he usurped
the powers that belonged to the people
and Parliament lie carried his preroga-
tive beyond its legitimate sphere; he cast
down and put under foot the constitution
al liberties of the people. The illustrious
men whom have named resisted the ty-
rant; aud the world, from that day to this,
has proclaimed them honored martyrs to
the cause Of constitutional liberty. They
died resisting the minister; they died in
favor of the constitution Of their country;
yet the Senator thinks loyalty is irrecon-
cilable with opposition to the minister.
disagree with the Senator All history
condemns his sentiments. The purest and
the loftiest patriots that have ever lived
are those who have manfully resisted the
encroachments Of executive power on the
liberties of the citizen. History has so
pronounced them, and liberty loving men
throughout all time will honor their mem
ories. ........
We who, in our humble way, at this
day oppose the usurpations of the present
Executive, are arraigned for want of loy-
atty, forsooth, because hostility to the
minister is not reconcilable with loyalty to
the Government. The Senator curiousIv
confounds the Government with the Presi-
dent We all owe allegiance to our Gov.
ernment, but we owe none to the minister,
unless he administers that Government
which is intrusted to him, in accordance
with the Constitution and laws of his coun-
try. When he violates those, in order to
be loyal to the great principles Of constr
tutional liberty, We must resist the en-
croaehments Of the minister, or the rights
and liberties OF the people viii be over
thrown. That is our duty to-day. That
liberty loving men in all past time have
done, and will do in the future. 1t is
only the tools of despots that will do 9TH
crwiSe.
grant you that loyalty is due to the
Government; allegiance is due to the Gov
ernment, but not to the minister The
Government, Mr.. President, was instituted
to protect and secure the people in their
lives, their liberty, and their property, and
whenever it fails to do that, the Govern
ment is no longer desirable. Our Consti-
tuition was formed for that purpose. In
deed, the Constitution is the written ex.