Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-12-28
The Cincinnati COnTnercinl's De'
acriuef0n Of the Gazette.


In Wednesday mornings STATESMAN we
gave extracts from the Csnciandtf Gdkette
discredItlng the ContmGciars credibility
ana Unionism. with view to impartiali-
ty, wesubjoin extracts from the Comnercidi
OF Wednesday, asserting the utter unrelia-
bility OF the Gazette. AS they both belong
to the same political party, 1t is to be pre-
sumed that their testimony in regard to
each other is correct; but is 1t not lamenta-
Bile that an inconsiGsrable number of peo-
pie should follow such false lights9 This
is what the Commercial has to say about the
Gazette:
The editor of the Gazette always misrep-
resents an opponent; never tries to tell the
truth about cne who disagrees with him;
never hesitates 10 falsify record or to at
tempt the perversion Of the plainest prop0-
sltions; and, while protesting abundantly
to be exceptionally bold, direct and inde-
I pendent, he Is distinguished byamoral cow
ardiee, as abject as his want of cantlor Is
contemptible. Fi 9aj % 4ahe''u'H' aH
Just now, It suits this unhappy person to
make his attacks upon the President, and
those who agree with his expressed views
as to the restoration of the Union, in the
disguise of violent assaults upon the Com
mercidI. He is too poor spirited to say the
President when he Is meant, and vents his
fanatical passion upon us.
Throughout the war the Gazette never lost
an opportunity to fire from the rear upon
the men of mettle who were doing the
fighting, reserving its admiration eXclu-
siyeiy for the fanatical vaporers who were
trying all the while TO make needless issues
to divide the people Of the North and divert
/ them from the practical work of breaking
down the military power of the rebellion.
! AS General Grant has been fighting rath-
er than proclamatOry General, and has
thought more of attending to the military
business than of writing anti-slavery es.
says, he has had the venomous hatred OF
the Gazette and its herd of impracticables
Missed at him all the while, There Is, there
FORE no need of surprise now that the Ga
zette's dRimus toward Grant is vented in its
usual style-that is by saying that he said
something which he never did say, and
then snarling at him for it, =
Mr.. Charles Sumner has said boldly that
the special message of the President was a
"white- washing" document. ""# Mr..
Thaddeus Stevens regards tile President
himself as an alien enemy. Those men are
the leaders of the Gdzette's party. 1t par
takes Of their characteristics, shows spirit
of bitterness and contention similar to
theirs, but Is timorous thus far as to accept
ing their conclusions. aT.- t. r r
They are, and Il is, of the faction who
hag-rode Mr.. Lincoln, scoffed and scorned
and worried him for years, giving him al
most as much trouble as the armed rebels;
and no,o they are ldboriRg TO preUent the TeS.o-
ration Of the linton as they didtO retdrd the
arms of The nation in the conquest Of the rebel
lion. Cooperating, in effect, toith Southern
traitors from The first, the unrecoRciled rebels
ind IN them the reddtest allies.
Our support of the President, the Gazette
says, is "based on the idea that he is
treacherous to the party that elected him,
and to the cause that the loyal people
have carried through to triumph" IL is
assumed here that ii the President does not
give up his convictions, and follow Sumner
and Stevens, he is traitor. There has
been good deal too much of this imperti-
nence on the part of the Radicals. They are
not the men who elected Lincoln and
johnson, and they are not the men who
have made the war for the Union success;
but they hare been bluRdererS, and nadrpl0ts
from the beginning, and they are neither the
monopolists of Republican principles nor
the sole expounders Of public faith and
virtue.
The pretense that the credit for our ma
tional safety is the property of the Radicals,
involves about equal proportions of false
hood and stupidity, and its ludicrous as
pect is relieved by the intensity of the
malice they displayin malignant and SLAM
derous speech, of all who object to their
leadership and pre-eminence. The ques-
tion as 10 the breaking up Of the Union party
totH be determined by The measure Of their in
taence. If they have the power, they will
break it, but we conjecture, it will turn out
that their departure, following the msts of
their fanaticism, will prove to be an ac-
cession of strength to those from whom |
they separate themselves.