The weekly union record., 1865-05-13
POLITICAL ETHICS.

week, which embodies the hypocritical cant of
q defeated aud malignant political party, who
now pretend 10 view with horror the very
things they have been most guilty Of them
selves. It is notorious that the Democratic
party have always been the most vindictive
aud unrelenting to their political opponents
Of any party that ever existed. Il is equally
notorious that that party, in the days of its
embraced il it's folds the great mass
of the vicious and immoral in the land. 1t is
true that the Union party is composed of peo-
pie Of all former shades of opinion, and that it
is good policy not to discuss antecedents of
former parties. But il may serve a good pur-
pose for once, to remind this present Demo
cratic party. as it calls itself, that those who
live in glass houses should not throw stones
too freely. They now claim for themselves all
the virtue, intelligence and morality Of the
country. In fact they DO little else but re-
count the glories Of the party in the past, and
discourse on the proprieties and moralities Of
parties. Politically bankrupt, this is now
their only resource. They talk of religion aud
morality bat it is said Satan and his angels.
when cast into hell, did the same thing. His
tory records that the Federal and Wing par
ties have been stigmatized 10 the last by such
meu. History records that they have de
nounced with unsparing vengeance the old
Hartford Convention. If oil they say OF that
be true it was DO worse than Southern seces
sion. Yet all old Federals were prosecuted to
the death, but these men, claiming to be un-
adnlterated Democrats, are ready to affiliate
with the traitors and secessionists of the
South Such is their consistency. Union
men condemn both the Hartford Convention
and Southern Secession. This writer says
" that had Mcclellan been elected, the Union
and the Constitution would have been pre-
served without another dollar spent, or an
other drop of blood she'd" And this. he says
" is fact history wiz preserve" That is TO
say, history will preserve fact that never
happened and which none but the Almighty
could know, would happen. 1t would be
something new if history should record as a
fact that which rests only on hypothesis and
never came to pass. History will record that
Mcclellan said in his West Point speech, that
" the Union must be preserved, and by war,
too, if necessary" History will record that
the Confederate Government always, to all
parties, down to the evacuation of Richmond
would neither submit nor listen to any other
terms than full independence. This writer
" delights TO contemplate what history will re-
cord" and the above is specimen Of his facts,
which will not be recorded.
1t is singular that this writer, who is en-
dowed with such prophetic vision, and who
charges that the Republican party made and
caused the war, and dates so much upon the
philosophy of the cause, should have voted for
Fremont for President. II be is TO be given
credit for all that he claims, be must have
known that the election of Fremont would
have caused a rebellion. The corner stone OF
all true Democracy is that the majority shall
rule. What caused the rebellion was the re.
fusual of Democracy, as be calls it, to abide
by the constitutional provisions that the ma
jority shall rule. The proposition hat if the
Democratic party elect they shall rule, but if
the opposing party succeed they shall not rule
but the Democratic party will rebel, strike al
the root of all Republican Government. And
this is the case of the present rebellion, and
the cause of it. The viudcation Of this prin-
ciple is the sole object of the war against the
rebellion on the part of the Administration
The writer in the Express carries one idea all
through his article, that the philosophy of the
causes of the rebellion lies in the al
tempt to drag moral questions from their
proper sphere into political action in oPposi
tion to the genius of our Government Again
be says slavery is both a moral and political
question. If it is political, it is certainly fit
subject for political action. But how is the
morality of slavery 10 be separated from its
political aspect You can only act upon it
as whole. If it is purely moral question,
then political action should not be had upon
it. But the writer confutes the whole idea Of
his long labored article, when he admits that
slavery is a political as well as moral question
Again, in the article we find the following {:
" The Democratic party have not ouly been
always in favor of the constitutional provision
restricting Congress from making any law re-
specting an establishment of religion, or pro
hbitiug the free exercise ihereof-thy have
not only always advocated a total separation
of Church and State as contemplated by that
provision, but they have ever advocated the
policy of prohibiting 10 the general or State
Government the application of a coercive civil
power TO make men moral" The writer in
his conclusion, states that the Democratic par
ty Is the only party whose tenets and conduct
are in harmony with the above. This is so
wholly false that it needs no reply. Every