Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-03-07
.sSecession at the NORTH"

seSeCesSiOm thc
Mr.. TKRHUxE, of the 3lst Indiana Volunteers,
addresses a note to the editor of the Indiana
State Journal, which he pronounces ''invalu-
able paper" inquiring whether in the fall OF 1860
il had stated that '-if any State wished to Sc
cede, no man north of Mason and Dixon's
line would say word against it?" The Jour
nal in response says that "a number of Dem
ocratic papers and speakers have tried to inter-
pose misrepresentation of (its) views and
misquOtatiOns of our Qts) language in regard to
secession ard then puts in the following just-
6catiOn of its course in lS60-6l:
"When South Carolina seeded and some
four or FIVE other States followed, we said
'sthat il those States would submit their case
to the Union, and after full and fair hearing
Of all Sides they were still resolved to co. for
one would vote to let them go.' But submis-
sion to the authority of the Union, and the per
mission 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 TO compel
Submission would cost than the seeding
States were worth, and If let alone to make and
manage a costly national government they would
soon increase taxes aud troubles to such 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.. TERHuSE. and
without the qualification that il now states ii
made when advocating the right of secession in
1860. In its issue OF Nov 18th, 1860 the Jour
nal said
% They (referring to the secessionsts) know
very well that it they are determined to leave
the Union no Republican will care 10 have them
stay. Union preserved only by intimidation
and force is a mockery, and it is better broken
than whole. If South Carolina and her associ.
ates in folly really want leave the Union. they
can 90 without a word OF objection from any man
north Of Mason and DixOn's line. Let all 60 who
want to. we say, and let them go quietly. build up
a new Government il they can, and when they
find that il won't pay let them come back on the
i. old terms, &c"
On the 18th of November following. referring
to the secession Of South Carolina:
'sThere will be no collision of hostile forces
unless she makes il, for the people of the North
will never raise or use an army TO force any
State to stay in the Union. Coercion,
We regard out Of the question in any case"
On the 18th of November. the same paper
said:
1--WE can imagine no evil equal to Ameri-
Coufederacy into independent nations would be
harmless beside it,"
On the 25th of November, in discussing "se
cession ane coercion il remarked:
':We deem it superhuous to argue that a popu-
Lae government can never be preserved by force
The act OF compulson changes it to a despotism.
so far as the parties afected by il are concerned
II then proceeds follows:
lie such an Union worth preservingr wessy
no. Practically, then, coercion costs us a great
deal and gives US nothing. theoretically il costs
still more, fer it costs US our consistency Sc
cession is reU0lHfi0R."
And Dow comes its justification Of secession
or revolution. for it regards both these terms as
expressing the same idea. Says the Journal:
We having established our government by
revolution, or the right Of a people at any time
to change a government which is oppressive tC
them. cannot deny that right to those who de
liberstely declare governments 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
may be mistaken In our Judgment they
are fatally mistaken, but we cannot judge fo
them whether the Federal Government is too op
pressve for endurance any more than EnglanC
could Judge for Us. We know how eloquent.
may be urged the glory OF this great country
and the Union cemented by the blood Of ou
fathers but it is all wasted beside the one plaiI
simple fact that If any state in this Union feel
the Union to be injurious and oppressive. civi
war cannot change her opinion. in fact il is no
calculated 70 change IT, and il she triH not sta.
in the Union. il will be cheaper and better to le
her GO
We couldeuote much more Of the same sort
but the extracts we have copied are sufficient 81
show that the South made to believe that tb
North we're equally anxious for a dissolution
OF the Union, (at least so far as the Republican
party was concerned) and the Southern State
adopted the cesl:nance Of secession under the i'm
preston that they would be allowed to go 81
peace" using the language Of Mr.. TEznusI
These arguments we're not copined to the jour
nal, but similar arguments and expressions Q
sentiment we're found in the most prominer
Republican papers Of the country. No disunion
ist in the South ever made 4 stronger case !
favor Of secession or a division of the Union. tina
the leading Republican prints Of the North froI
November 1860 to April 1861, and could tn
5outhern people in favor Of division receive an
other impression than that the party then comin
70 power would be willing to permit all the dissai
isfed States 90 in peacef If the positions Of IN
Journal and It's co-lOborers we're right in 1860
and it or they hare never made the effort to cor