The Weekly Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, O. [Ohio]) 1861-1???, 1864-04-13
HARMONY.

At the present time, no candid Union
man need DO told that there should be har-
mCny of action and sing of purpose
among all men who are earnest in their
support of the Government, and honest in
their profossed desire to see the rebellion
crushed 1t is time when all Union men
should cheeriuly and cordially acquiesco
10, and faithfully support the acts of ma
Jority of tho Union party. No feeling of
personal hate, or desire for political adj
vancoment, or tho interest of political
oiques, should bo permitted to interrupt,
or cause jar in tho harmonious action of
tho Union men of the country When OIL
Ces are TO be filled, every person has his
choice as to the candidate, but when the
majority have expressed their choice,
II is the duty of the minority to yield, for
tho timo, thoir personal preferences, and
cordially co.aperatc r support of the pol.
icy dictated by the majority. II this pro.
position is not true, then all political and
social organizations lack cohesive force,
and are liable at any moment to disruption
IN which case we must admit the entire Jus.
tice Of the rebellion.
Believing, rs we do, that harmonious nc.
tion among Union men is OF vital impor.
tance, and that efforts at disruption should
promptly frowncd upon by the loyal
masses, we havo been painod, If not sur.
prisod, at tho late course of tho Toledo
Blade. When the call--which we publish
in our editorial column-.-for District
Convention WAS issued, the BhI,le, instead
OF publishing 10, and endeuvorng to unite
the loyal men Of tho District in both Their
primary and District Conventions, de
nounced it, and the Committee which ISSUED
it; and since that time, it has, almost daily
been publishing articles unquestionably in
tended to prevent harmonious action
among the Union men who are called upor
to meet in this District Convention.
But what is the reason for this action o
the Blade? After reading all that it ha,
published concerning the call, the only an
swer that We can give to this question il
simply the fact that the District Committc,
appointed by those who supported NJ.
Waite for Congress, in 1862, had no yoic
IN issuing this call. II hat Committee Ia,
issued the same call, or been consulted con
Serning it. the Blade would undoubtedl
have been satisfied, 1t is readily to be see
therefore, that the difficulty with the Blad
now is, not as to tho principles onenciote
in the call, but as to the names Of n
men who sign il.
In 1862, the Convention which nominate
Mr.. Ashley as candidate Tor Congress, al
pointed the Committee which issued tn
call, The Convention which nominate
Mr. Waite also appointed Committees oac
was Union" Committee for this Co
gressional District, aud was appointed f,
two years As tho Blade objects TO Il
action of the Committee which issued Il
present call, it necessarily raises the que
tion Of which Committee Is entitled to a
for the Union party. And il it is rig
fiat the majority should rule, then ia
Committee which at the time of its appoi,
mentreprosenled the majority of Union ruc
is now best entitled TO act FOR the Uni,
party. Has tho Blade any DOUBT as
which Committee, at the time OF its sppoil
ment represented a majority Of the Uni
men Of the District3 If so, we propose