Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1865-08-02
A nNa,R snii.u

Independence AS its platform, is unbounded
aud inexpressble II is not OF all surprising,
since It is so diAmetticaily opposed 10 every
thing that Copperheads advocate. The idea
that Thomas Jefferson should have made o
platform that none but Union mon can stand
upon is sotely Distressing to modern Democ-
racy. But Il is true Thomas jefferson must
have been a prophet when he framed the De
clsration, for Il is precisely suited TO the
Union party Of ls65.-JournaL f.tr
The journal evidently thinks. thai
I whatever is boldly asserted and plausibly
maintained in its columns, will be accepted
as positive truth. The above bold assertion,
that the Declaration of Independence "is
precisely suited to the Union party Of
1885," reminds us Of certain meeting OF
extremes.
! When the work of cecession began, the
Disuniouists placed themselves on the
broad platform of the Declaration of In
dependence, and thus justified their pro-
ject Of destroying the Union. They laid
great stress upon that portion of it which
says: "When in the course of human
events, it becomes necessary for one people
to dissolve the political bands which have
connected them with another, and to as
sumo among the powers of the earth the
separate and equal station to which the
laws of nature and Of natures God entitle
them" and found, in these words, war
rant for their acts of secession. In their
pursuit of happiness" they regarded this
same Union party Of 1865, as having
caused the general Government to "be-
come destructive of these ends" and that
it therefore became the right and duty Of
the Southern people to "throw off such
government and provide for their future
security by instituting" a Confederate
Government of the Southern States, the
foundation of which should be laid upon
such principles as secessionists thought
most likely to "Affect their safety and hap
piness."
We will not attempt to decide this point
Of difference between the abolitionists and
secessionists,' or whether there is any differ
ence.
We have no hesitation in saying that
the following portions of the Declaration
of Independence are especially "suited to
the Union party of 1865" which declare
that the "history of the present Aboli-
ton Union party is history of repeated
injuries and usurpations, all having in
direct object the establishment Of an abb
solute tyranny over these States"
To prove this, we have only to refer to
the ruthless conscription law and the pro-
clamations suspending the privilege of
Ha5eas Corpus, in imitation Of king John;
and the thousands of military bastiles
throughout the country.
1t "has affected to render the military
independent of and superior to the civil
power, "and"i in many cases has deprived US
of the benefit of trial by jury" the climax
of which was reached in the death, by
strangulation, of an innocent woman.
1t "has erected multitude of new Of
fees, and sent hither swarms of officers to
harass our people and eat ont their sub
stance" as thousands of Revenue and
Provost Marshal's officers will duly attest.
1t has endeavored to prevent the pop
ulation of these States; for that purpose,
obstructing the naturalization offoreigners
refusing to pass others to encourage their
migration hither," of which the Alien
an6 Sedition, law is apartment example.
1t "has excited domestic insurrection
among US, by unlawfully arresting and
imp.isoning our most worthy and respect
able citizens; by declaring martial law,
SO as to oppress the people, and advocat-
ing an undistinguished destruction of all
ages, sexes, and conditions, for no other
reason than their attachment and devotion
to Democratic principles.
A party, whose character is thus mar
ked by every act which may define a
tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler Of free
people" 4og
To all these acts of tyranny, the De-
mocracy stand diametrieally opposed, and
will SO remain until the people, in their
''fury" shall drive these usurpers from