Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1865-08-12

every body--lriends and foes. The i'm
mortal John N. must look to his laurels,
for surpassed in the particular Of origin
atty he certainly is by 3 new candidate
for immortal honors whiz j. d.
Whether j. d. can yet equal j. N, in
the particular of nerve, remains to be seen
Doubtless the social voters will one day
separate and the downtrodden race go over
dry shod, to possess some chosen spot
some land flowing with milk and honey
where they may enjoy the Africans idea
of liberty. as "they toll not neither
spin"
For the present we will consider "the
social question" settled by the oracular
response. We are compelled to do so by
"muddle" into which we are thrown, on
contemplation of \ new view which he
incidentally presents of "Loyalty."
The word, as one of now frequent use
in American political terminology, origin
ated with the dominant party, and was
never heard of among us, until the com
mencement Of the late civil war, or rebel
lion. 1t was word of frequent use before
the revolutionary war, and was used by
the tories of that era, who designated
themselves as loyalists, or men loyal to
the king of Great Britain. We remember
its frequent use in the Canadian newsps-
pers, where each political party ever
strives to saddle upon the other the charge
that such and such proposed measure is
Gisloyal, that is, subyersive Of the prero-
gative of the Grown, or disrespectful to her
Majesty the Queen.
In short, prior to the time mentioned,
it was never put to use, except in connec-
ton with the supposed "divine right of
kings" or the exercise of some political
right, divine or otherwise, not derived
from the consent of the governed"
The manner of its use among us for the
past two years, has been vague. All sorts
of men, in all sorts of places, have been
denounced as disloyal, and the question,
what constitutes a loyal man has for the
past -four years been problem difficult Of
solution.
Does Loyalty consist in support of the
Constitution and the laws of Congress
passed in pursuance thereof?
Does it consist in support of the Ad-
ministration-the men who, for the time
being, have been selected to administer the
law ? Or does it consist in persistent ad-
herence to the creed of political party !?
General Cox has evidently some original
idea on this subject Hear him. AS his
letter is long, it may not be improper to
state, that the following extract may be
found in its last paragraph:
"Such are my personal opinions upon the
subjects you have called 10 my attention For
them | alone am responsible The subjects
themselves can in no sense be matter for ex-
ecutiye action in this State, and whether | am
only such weight or influence as their own
value will entitle them to- As they seiH not
hinder me from giuing cordial support 10 the
action of loyal Federal Government, il
other views shall finally prevail" &c, &c.
Cox will support a loyal Federal Gov
ernment, He reserves himself on the
question of support to disloyal Federal
Government. Then, in his opinion. it is
obvious that loyalty does not consist in
support of the government.
To whom can the Federal Government
be disloyal =? To the States and the People,
; to the Constitution, which is the expres-
sed will of the people, from which the
government" derives its power. or to the
behests Of a political party? Will some
Daniel come to judgment, and tell US
!. what Cox means Some say Oox's letter
: declares for negro equality, some say il
declares against negro equality. Can any
}, one tell US, what on earth, or in the
heaven above the earth, or in the waters
t under the earth, he means by loyal Fed
e sral Govsrnmsnt9
4 A New Orleans letter to the Mobile News