Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-06-17

iionable had passed either branch Of the Legisla-
ture when tbey bolted. they had il in their power
T. defeat any legislation they desired. by consti
tusiun.I means. No bills ean pass the rWo last
DAYS of the session except such a. he Governor
my veto. So that according to the Journal.
only FIVE days were left for legislatian when the
Republican members Of the House seeded. But
such is the disposition Of the Journal to lie. that
Il fails to tell the truth when the truth would he
better for its cause than lie. The Republican
members were absent twelve days The Audi
tors books will show that they only got pay for
forty nine days
The Journal complains tina, early in the session
an appropriation was made for the paw Of MEMBER
True. But il WAS in accordance with Republican
precedent The Legislature two years previous
the one that elected LANE Senator did the same
thing. And !, was done at the late session upon
the suggestion Of Mr. BRAxHAM. and he fixed
the amount. And why was it done? II was to
carry out in good faith the Treasury laws OF
1859 and 1861 Before then the Treasurer bad
been in the habit of making advances to mem
bers without an appropriation until the close Of
the session. but the law Of 1859 forbid any dis
bursements unless by appropriations in pursuance
OF law. Hence the appropriations.
The appropriation bills ut the lest session for
the support Of the State Government. to paw the
interest upon the public debt. and 10
assist the wounded and sick Indiana
soldiers, were all prepared and ready at
the usual time. Those bills are generally
passed on the hfty ninth day Of the session.
Nothing but the secession and absence Of the
Republican members prevented them from being
enacted into laws. II they had returned to their
seats on the Saturday previous 10 the adjourn
ment, they would have been passed. So. in that
regard. the Republicans are without excuse
They knew that their absence would have the
very effect IL has had The Republican mem
bers themselves stated the interest could not be
paid without n specific appropriation by the Leg
islature They placed that construction upon the
law of 1889. by making the appropriations to pay
the interest in the general appropriation bill of
that year and also in 1861.
The gree. concern of the Journal and the Re
publican leaders il the opinions and decision Of
the Supreme Judges upon the interest question
We are not surprised at that The arguments of
the Judges cannot be overcome, hence they must
be abused personally. If the Journal really
thinks that the opinions are such great outrsges
and so untenabIe: whv does it not present them to
its readers TO sustain it, positonf Ii dare not do
that. IL dare not let its readers see the opinions
which Il attempts 10 weiken by lies about the
men who wrote them. Why this disrespect Of
the decisions Of the Supreme Court. when it
claims entire obedience and the most obseaues
respect fnr the decisions Of the Repubcrn
Judges? If laws are to he resnecte1 and obeyed
the decisions Of the Courts must be sustained
The Journal charges that Judge PERKINS
is influenced entirely by partisan sympathi,s.
and that Judge HANNA has "the credit OF
beng a candid md open foe Of his country and
nothing else" Who IL il that thus SANDERS the
men who fearlesslv md honestly discharge their
duty and that they have done so no honest and
unbiased man can question who reads their opin.
ions? In 1860 and 1861. the editor of the Jour
nal was in favor Of peaceable separation of the
dcd az worse evil than the loss Of dozen
States. he was in favor Of disunion. He pro
claimed the secession Of South Carolina nm act of
revolution. justified by the Declaration of indie
pendence. and that IL was n virtual dissolution of
the Union. He wrote articles to show the advan-
tiges of separation TO the North. The
Montgomery Constitution. with the exception
of it, recognition Of the principles Of
the Dred Scott decision. he pronounced better
chart Of government than our own. These de-
clarations were made before the fall of Sumter
After the war was naugurated. three months
afterward. in July. 1851. he reiterated the cor
rectness Of all the previous declarations he had
made and TO which we have briefly referred. and
stated his entire willingness to let the Rebel
States leave the Union. if they would Inv dow
their arms lie in favor of separation. hut
il was peaceablc not forcble disruption of The
Union that he desired This is the man that calls
in question the integrity aud loyalty Of the Su
preme Judges and the Democratic members of
the Legislature If he had particle Of honesty.
or shame. like the ostrich he would stick his head
which the exhibition of his other extremties
should occasion him
The Journal inquiries why the desire of the
Democracy to call an extra session ot the Lesis
lature. This question il easily answered. They
are willing To make personal sacrifices to main
tain the honor and credit of the State Thew are
opposed to the exercise of one man power. They
believe it an example dangerous to the libertie-
OF the people They have no other motives than
these. The Journal having no integrity or regard
for the public interests. can not appreciate hon
esty in others or devotion To the public welfare
above all personal or partisan considerations
So clear is the Governor and the Republican
members of the Legislature responsible for the
failure to pass the laws necessary To- maintain the
honor and credit of the State, that none bui
bisoted partisans will deny it. They can not.
honestly