Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-03-02


Mr. TEnHuxE, OF the 3lst Indiana Volunteers. /
.ddre~-e. a note 70 the editor OF the Indiana
State Journal, which he ptonoubces an ''invalu-
able paper" inquiring whether 10 the fall OF 1850
IL had stated that If any State wished to Sc
cede. no man porth OF Mason and DiEons
line would say word against III" The Jour
nal IN response says that "a number OF Dem
ocralic papers aud speakers have tried % Inter
pose Misrepresentation Of our (its) views and
Interpretations OF our (its) language i" regard to
secession. ard thea puts in the following Jas'i-
fcation Of IL course IN le6o-6i:
"when South Carolina seeded and some
four or Eve other States followed. We said
..tbat il those States would submit their case
10 the Union. and after a foil and fair hearing
of all sides, they we're still resolved 70 90, we Tor
one would vote 20 let them go But submis- |
siou 10 the authority of the Union, aud the per |
nissoD Of the Union for their separation, We
made indispensable. In this view very many OF
the ablest Republican papers OF the time con-
Cured. They believed that war 10 compel
Admission would cost more than the seeding
States.were worth, aud it let alone to make aud
manage a costly national government they would
soon increase taxes and troubles TO such an ex-
tent that the peaple would force them back into
the Union upon our own terms
The fact Is the Journal did use the language
and sentiment quoted by Mr.. TEKHuSE, and
without the qualification that it now states it
made when advocating the right OF secession in
1860 In its issue of Nov 18th, 1860 the Jour
nal said
They referring 10 the secessionsts) know
very well that ii they are determined to leave
the Union no Republican will care 10 have them
STAY A Union preserved only by intimidation
and force is a mockery. and il is better broken
than whole. If South Carolina and her assOci-
ates in folly really want 10 leave the Union, they
can 90 without a word Of objection from any man
north of Mason and Dixons line. Let all 60 who
want to, We say and let them 60 quietly. build no
new Government il they can, and when they
find that il wont paw let them come back oil the
old terms, &c"
On the 18th of November following. referring
to the secession Of South Carolina:
"There will be no collision of hostile forces
unless she makes il. for the people Of the North
will never raise or use an army 10 force any
State TO STAY in the Union. Coercion,
We regard out of thee ueston in any case"
On the 18th OF November, the same paper
said:
I'VE can imagine no evil equal to an Amer-
can civil war. The separation of The whole
Confederacy into independent nations would be
harmless beside IT,
On the 2sth OF November, in discussing "se
cession coercion.' il remarked:
1--WE deem il superfuous to argue that DODu-
lac government never be preserved by force
The act OF compuIsion changes IL to a despotism
far the parties affected by il are concerned
IL then proceeds follows:
lis such an Union worth preservingY Wesay
no. Practically. then. coercion costs us great
deal and gives us nothing. Theoretically it costs
u still more, fer il costs Us consistency. Sc
eession IS resolution
And now comes its justification of secession.
or revolution. for it regards both these terms
expressing the same idea. Says the Journal:
We having established our government by
revolution or the right of people at any time
Ia change government which IS oppressive to
them. cannot deny that right to those who de
Iberately declare our government oppressive.
What we claimed as our right we cannot deny
TO those who claim it OF us, and helped US
assert our claim at the outset. They
NAV be mistaken. la Judgment they
are fatally mistaken but we cannot judge for
them whether the Federal Government Is too OPP
pressiye for endurance any more than England
could Judge tor Us. We know how eloquenty
may be urged the glory OF this great country
and the Union cemented by the blood of our
fathers but it is all wasted beside the one plain
simple fact that il any state in this Union ieels
the Union to he injurious aud oppressive, civil
war cannot change her opinion, in fact Il IL not
calculated To- change ". and " she tcW not stay
Ia the Union il will be cheaper and better to let
her GO"
We could quote much more OF the same sort
but the extracts we have copied are sufficient to
show that the South made to believe that the
North we're equally anxious Tor dissolution
OF the Union, (at least far as the Republican
party was concerned) and the Southern State:
adopted the ordinance of secession under the i'm
preston that they would be allowed to 60 "ir
peace" using the language of Mr.. TrRnuSr
These arguments not confined To the Jour
nal, bu, similar arguments and expressions o
sentlment were found Ia the most prominen
Republican papers oi the country No disunion
ist in the South ever made stronger case u
f,vorof secession o, division OF the Union. thai
the leading Republican prints of the North iron
November 1861 to April l-6i, and could th
Southern people iu iavor of division receive an,
other impression than TIA, the party then coming
to power ~oald DC willing Ia permit all the dssa'
is6cd States go In pescer II the positions OF tn
Journal and its co-loborers were right in le6O
aud /; or they have never made the effort to cou
trovert them certainly their course now Ia ad
vocsting a different policy ouly shows that the
are talsc 10 their deliberately espftsse, convc
tiou, OF right and duty. Aud with What grae
do charges oi "disoyalIy" come from such
sourceS'
---