Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1864-09-14
The Proposed Convention OF the
States.


The proposition made at Chicago to
have Convention of all the States is sur
rounded by so many difficulties so long as
the organized military power Of the rebel
lion continues to exist, that the Democratic
press has almost ceased to discuss its ieasl-
bility. They may indulge in ranting
about it. but seriously to canvass the diff
cultes in the way, they do not attempt,
The standing objection to anything of that
kind is the present attitude and temper of
mind of the rebel leaders. As yet they
give no indications of willingness t. OBJ
tain peace a. the sacrifice of that for which
they rebeled, that is, their independence
The Richmond Dispatch, of August 81,
says;
1Whenever a treaty of peace shall be
made. It must 5edoBe solely on the basis Of
the entire independence and Sovereignty Of
each particular State. That must be pre-
liminary to, and cannot be subject Of,
negotiation"
Again, in speaking of the military status
during negotiations for a treaty of peace,
it saws. an folLo1os that there ca" be no
sue6 thing as treating f0r peace N ea7"esf
until eUery hostile soldier shall haze been
,0it6draaOa from our soil, and eUery hostile
shin from. our s0aters. Then we can talk
of peace and all those matters of secondary
importance"
JEFF. Davis is himself prevented by the
Montgomery Constitution from permitting
a Convention of the States until long
preliminary time shall be exhausted in the
assembling of State Conventions to change
the Constitution. Thus it is that the
great obstacle in the way of peace is the
organized military power OF JEFF. Davis
But even, supposing, that all the Difficult
ties could be disposed of and that negotia-
tons could begin. What is the first
question to Isettle, which would confront
the negotiators Evidently but this, wbe-
ther there are t1oo nations or Bat one. Ne
gotiations wonld not be in this case, as in
the case of two foreign nations that had
agreed upon an armistice, and had come
together to consult on some intricate OF
knotty question of diplomacy. In the pro
posed negotiation between the North and
Sonth, there is no such intricate OF com
plicated problem. 1t is a very simple
question. 1t is question that can be de-
cided. lust as well before an armistice as
after. 1t is whether we shall give up our
nationality and acknowledge the indepen-
ience of the rebels This is the only
question, but it is q vital question. Until
therefore, there is some assurance that
this question would be answered in favor
of reunion, those sOko consent to an drnais-
tiee must consent to separation. The reb-
els viii have greater advantage for secur-
ing their purposes, which military force
no longer threatens them, than while they
are confronted on all hands, bv our victo-
rious armies. If we are ready to consent
beforehand TO separation, then an armis
tice will be of great utility in settling our
relations. But if the North are unwill-
ing to tolerate the idea of separation, let
there be no armistice until the rebels,
headed by their leaders, agree to aeHnow-
ledge the unity of the Republic.
If anybody needs confirmation of the
soundness of this doctrine let him simply
consider the statsls of affairs in consequence
Of an armistiee. Is the blockade to be
raised? If SO, we simply guarantee the
independence of the South. During the
interruption of the blockade they would
export a million dollars worth Of cotton.
If it is not to be raised, then you have war
on the sea and peace on the land. But
peace on the land, how2 By letting our
armies remain where they are? But the
rebels insist that they will have 10 nego-
tistion, so long as the Hinvader" is on their
soil. What then must be done2 Evident
ly our armies must be Withdrawn. But
will the withdrawal of our armies facilitate
the reconstruction of the Union? Will
the surrender of Kentucky, Tennessee,
Georgia, Western Virsinis, the Mississippi,
New Orleans and Little Rock, together
with the numerous forts on the sea coast,
dispose the rebels to surrender what they
viii not no'0 do? To expect it is absurd.
The reconstruction of the Union and con-
sequent permanent peace are further off
than ever. You simply give the rebels the
advantage in negotiation. You say come
back to the Union with slavery. They say
We will not. You say we viii conquer you
The rebels ssy, go on we are much better
of than we were before the withdrawal of
your armies Evidently the road back is
longer, Bloodier than the road forward.
There is then but one chance remaining.
That is to fight it through. We have gone
beyond the midnight of these critical times.
The shortest road to light is, therefore, for
wsrd through whatever darkness vet re-
mains. The war is pressing sorely upon
MS, say the peace men. 1t is good sign.
There is evidence that the war is pressing
far more sorely on our enemies. Let every
spirit therefore bend up to its full hight
Before you are Peace and Union. Behind
you are disunion and all the imaginable
bloody strifes for border warfare. To go
forward is possible and ends in light. To
60 backward ends in darkness impenetra- |
Bic.