Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-05-13
The Ohio Democracy and Presi-
dent .IOhnsOn i'm ISOI--Va1ly!


The following is going the rounds OF the
Administration press: i
SUGGEsTIvE.--Ata State Convention held
In Columbus on the 23d of January, 1861;
while James Buchanan was President, ana
The rebellion was being inaugurated, the
Democrats OF Ohio sent greeting to their
Southern brethren as follows:
sResolred, That the two hundred thous-
and Democrats of Ohio send to the people
of the United States, both North and South,
greeting; and when the people OF the n ortn
shall have fulfilled their duties to the ConstI-
tuition and the South, then, and not TILL then,
will it be proper for them to take into con-
the question of the proprlety OF
coercion
The history of that Convention is worth
hunting up. 1t may be suggestive IN the
coming campaign in Ohio, as preliminary
to that other Convention which resolved
about "four years of failure" fSF
The object contemplated by its publica-
ton is, doubtless, to make it appear that
the Democratic party did not thirst exceed
ingly for the shedding of fraternal blood.
This resolution was adopted on the 23d OF
January, 1861, and declared 1t to be the
wish of the Democracy of Ohio that the
North should, before embarkingin the War,
fulfill "their duties to the Constitution and
to the South" Go tell your neighbor, with
the stress of emphasis, that on the 23d OF
January, 1861, the Democracy of Ohio were
animated by that sort of treason that led
them to make an open proclamation, that
it was preferable continuance of peace
should be purchased by "the people of the
North" fulfilling "their duties to the
Constitution and to the South" than that
War should be accepted. Tell them, furth-
er, that the spirit in which this resolution
Is now reproduced by the Administration
press admits of but this construction: For
the sake Of Peace and Union they acere not
,villipg to perform "thetr duties to the Con-
stitution and the South" Stop not here, but
read to them the following from the speech
of Senator ANDREW JOHNSON, (who is now
the President of the United States, and to
whom in hushed suspensethe people, North
and South, East and West, are looking to
hear the announcement of such policy as
shall permanently paeiiy the country,) made
in the United States Senate, February 5,
1861, thirteen days after the aforesaid resolu-
tion was adopted in State Convention by
the Democracy OF Ohio:
Referring to charge of Senator LANE,
that Mr.. JOHNSON was in favor of war on
tha Conth Mr. JouNsoN said.
81 march down upon South Cardinal
Did propose any such thing? No! War
is not the natural element of my mind; and
as stated in that speech, my thoughts were
turned on peace, and not on war. | want
no strife. | want no war. In the language
of a denomination that is very numerous in
the country, may say hate war and love
peace. belong to the. peace party, j
Thought, when / was making that speech,
that was holding out the olive branch of
peace. wanted to give quiet and reconcile
alton to distracted and excited country.
S. s.
~. do not believe the Federal Government
has the power to coerce State; for by the
amendment of the Constitution of
the United States it is expressly provided
that you cannot even put one of the States
of this Confederacy before one of the courts
of the country as party. AS State, the
Federal Government has no power to coerce
it; but it is member of the compact to
which it agreed in common with the other
States, and this Government has the right to-
pass laws, and to enforce those laws upon
individuals within the limits of each State.
While the one proposition Is clear, the other
is equally so. This Government can, by the
Constitution OF the country and by the laws
enacted i'm conformity with the Constitution,
operate upon individuals, and has the right
and the power, not TO coerce State, but to
enforce and execute the law upon individ-
uals within the limits of a State. L know
the term, To cOerce State, is used in an al
cdptdnd,un manner. 1t is sovereignty that
is to be crushed! How is State in the
Union? What is her connection with it? All
the connection she has with the other States
is that which is agreed upon In the cOnnec-
tion between the States. l do not know
whether you may consider IL in the Union,
or whether you simply consider it con-
nection or discofnection with the other
States; but to- the extent that State nulli-
fies or sets aside any law or any provision
of the Constitution, to that extent it has
dissolved its connection, and no more. i
tNtIuh Ut6 DtttCo UtuC HuOC puooCW thCd NCfoO
Hberty bills, in ISOLATION of the Constitution of
the United States, coming in conflict 10Th the
figitiue sldve ld,c, to that eDtent haze dissoLued
their connection, and TO that ertent ii is revOlu-
ton. But because some OF the tree States
have passed laws violative of the Constitu-
ton: because they have, to some extent, dis
solved their connection with this Govern
ment, does that justify us of the South In
following that bad example? Because
they have passed personal liberty bills,
and have, to that extent, violated
the contract which is reciprocal,
shall we turn around, on the other hand,
and violate the Constitution by coercing
them to compliance with it? Will we do
so? Then come back to the starting point.
Let us stand in the Union and upon the
Constitution, and if anybody is to leave
this Union, or violate its guarantees, it shall
be those who have taken the initiative, and
passed their personal liberty bills. ] am In
the Union, and intend to stay in it. I in
tend to hold on to the Union, and the guar
antees under which this Union has grown;
and do not intend to be driven from it, nor
out of it, by their unconstitutional! enact
ments. ..JU lfeiLHtGh /
''But. Mr.. President, recurring to what /
said yesterday, there are t,oo parties in this
country thai aoant to break up The Government.
Who are they? The nullliers proper of the
South, the secessionists or disunionists, Tor
use them all as synonymous terms. There
Is portion of them who per Sc, desire2 the
disruption of the Governmentfor purposes
of their own aggrandizement. do not
charge upon them that they want to break
up the Government for the purpose of af-
fecting slavery; yet charge that the break
ing up OF the Government would have that
effect; the result would be the same. Who
else is for breaking up-this Government?
refer to some bad men Of the North. There