The spirit of democracy. [volume] (Woodsfield, Ohio) 1844-1994, 1865-03-22
what is Disloyalty?

csaspira.ors, Jadgs Drunimond, OF the
Uuited States District Court, for the
Nsrthern Districs of Illinois, was called /
as a Witness by Judge Morris, one of the
defendants. In his cress-examination by
the Judge Advocate, he gave definition
Of disioyalsy, which, coming as it does
from an administrator nan, exhibits
lsoundness of judgment, elerness OF ex-
preston, candor aud honesty very praise
worthy.
Every Administration man who as
tPirss to be anything nere than ranting
demagogue, should carefully read Judge
Drummond's testimony, and then as care
fully abstain from denouncing men as
disloyai, when in ninety-nins cases out of
. huadred the charge is false. Every
Denseerat shoald carefully read it, to the
/ end that if he be accused Of disleyalty, he
may be better able 20 put his aecuser to
ishame, if there be shame In him.
We give only such part of the testi-
fmeny as bears directly upon the point of
3disloyalsy
@. BY Judge Adyocate-Please state
whether the opinion you have given as
to Judge Morris loyalty, is not matter
Of your own conviction rather than that
fof his public reputation2
/ A. 1t is necessary to discriminate In
relation to that term. There are great
tmaay men in our community, as there are
here, who charge every one who happens
to differ with any measure or policy of
the Administration with disloyalty.-
There are many men in Chicago, for in
stance, who might call Judge Morris dis
Aleyal, because he deaounces the Presi-
dent for various proelamations that he has
made but when you come to the true
definition of loyalty, I do not know that
by any intelligent man he vould be charg-
cd as disloyal-
Q. Do you define dislOyalty as synon-
ymous with treasou2
A. No, sir do not SO define it
do not think disloyalty can go so far.
1 @. Have you net been Democrat?
] \. No sir. | was whig before you
were born. I never affiliated with the
democratic party in the slightest.
@. Did You vote for Mr.. Lincoln?
A. l did, sir, in 1850 and 1864, I
am war man, from the beginning have
been opposed to all compromise, and have
believed that this matter never can be set
tiled except by force,-by war.
Q. Did Judge Morris hold the same
views?
: A. No sir; 10 not think he did. /
think Judge Morris has been man of
of peace; his opinion has been that the
matter ought to be settled by peace,-by
[comp7omise; and I believe that a loyal
I @. Peace at all hazards?
1 A. / think that a man who is con-
fvineed in his own mind that this country
can never be united by war, may be op-
lposed to war, aud still be a loyal man.
/ @. That does net quite meet the ques-
ltion. want to knew, if, with your esti-
mate of loyalty, you would admit man
to be loyal who would consent to peace on
Ethe terms of separation from this govern
Imsnt; would you class such man as loyal
Tor disleyal2
| A. understand loyalty to consist in
obedience to the Governments and the
law. ] can only repeat what said before
THAT if a man is convinced in his own mind
that by war this country can never be
tunited--if this is his honest conviction
The may be in favor of peace and still be q
loyal man.
! Supposing we are at war with foreign
nation, it would not be pretended that a
man might not be for peace and yet be a
loyal man; if he was satisfied that the
continuance of the war would only add to
the expenditure Of treasure and blood,
land be of no benefit to the country, he
Ecertainly could be an advocate for peace
and still be a loyal man. So it may be,
/ 1 apprehend, in the case of the rebellion,
that if man is satisfied in his ewn mind
that his country cannot be united by war
land perhaps there is ne man who has
II mot, at some time during the past FIVE
years, had doubts forced upon his mind
he may be in favor Of peace, and yet be a
loyal man.
| Q. Under that rule would not eyery
soldier in the rebel army be entitled to
be called loyal man?
A. No, sir.
i Q. Does he not honestly believe that
by war this country cannot again be uEi-
ted?
| A. These rebels, have always main
tanned, took up arms against the Govern
u,ent without any cause. No wrong had
been done them by the Government; no
fright of property or person had been vio-
Hated. They own obedience to the Gov
lernment and to the law, and when they
teek up arms they committed treason
against the Government, they, therefore,
subjected themselves to all the pains and
penalties of treason. 1t is difficult for
me to understand that their position is
precisely similar to that of a man of peace
who believes that continuance Of the
war will end in the rupture and dismem-
berment Of the country. Ny answer,
therefore is, that rebels in arms are not
loyal, but | can understand that man
OF peace may be loyal, though opposed to
the further prosecution of the war.
q. 1t then occurs whether such man
as loyal to the Government2
II A.. / think if man obeys the laws,
t-Y.