Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-05-03

The Statesman and the Democratic
Press Censured for Defending
General sherman.
Some of the Administration press are no
pleased because THE STATESMAN and th'
Democratic press very generally rallied U
the defense of General SHERMAN. 1t is no
true that the Democratic press had beer
in the habit of disparaging General SHER
MAN and his military campaign. Admit
however, that it is true they did so, doe:
this furnish a justification to the Admins
tration press to write him down into posi-
tion of degradation, because the first agree
ment he entered into with General JOHN
sroN for the complete closing out of the
War did not receive the appreciation of the
Administration? The Democratic press
have plead that General SHERMAN should
not be consciously dealt with by the pub
lie until it was ascertained whether he was
animated by unworthy motives, and not be-
cause of sympathy with rebels" This they
did because they were disposed to do and to
see Justice done to General SHERMAN. They
did not insist that the terms on which he
agreed to receive the surrender of all the
rebel troops should be ratified by the Ad-
ministration. In relation to it they offered
no advice. They even went so far as to con-
cede that General SHERMAN had probably
exceeded his powers; but they suggested
that Justice to General SHERMAN called for a
suspension of harsh judgment upon this
act, until it was ascertained whether he
should seek to set up his will against the
Judgment of the Administration. The fact
that he, with most commendable prompti-
tude, put the will of the Administration in
to execution shows the sagacity of that sug-
gestion, and it furnishes reason why that
portion of the press that were swift to dis
credit him in The eyes of the people should
be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
A portion of the Administration press
have spoken of Gen. SHERMAN in terms OF
severest censure and condemnation, as
though he had been guilty of the most flag
rant of crimes; they have even gone to
work to hunt up alleged declarations OF his
prior to the breaking out of the Rebellion
to convict him of entertaining sympathetic
feelings with Secession. What crime
or offense had he committed that such
a course of proceedings was render
ed necessary or justillable? The work
assigned him was to assist in putting
down and crushing out the Rebellion, and
we suppose it was the desire of the people,
at least, that this should be done In the brief
est space of time possible, and with the
least imaginable sacrifice of life. By his
generalship, which challenges the admira-
ton of the military world, General SHER-
MAN virtually compelled the surrender of
Gen. LEE and thereby placed Gen. JOHN
sToN in such position as to render further
resistance futile. 1t was proper, therefore,
that an effort should be made to terminate
the War without the shedding of any more
blood. Gen. SHERMAN's conference with
Gen. JOHNSTON was for the purpose of as
certaining on what terms all the Rebel
armies would be surrendered and the peo-
pie of the insurgent States enter into
an obligation to yield obedience to. the
authority of the Federal Government. Will
itbe pretended thaG the object was not
worthy one? Don't we want Union and
Peace that will enable the Administration
to greatly diminish the proportions of the
army and the attendant expenditures?
Gen. SHERMAN negotiated terms that he
thought would beyond doubt secure this
much prayed for end. These terms he sub
mitted to the Administration for its ap-
proval or disapproval, and until thus rati-
fled they were to be of no force. This is
s'the head and 'front.' of General SHERMAN's
offending, and we put the question: SIS it
an offense of such magnitude as to render
General SHERMAN deserving OF the vindic-
tive abuse that has been showered upon
him by very large number of the Admin
istration press"