Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-06-29
NEWARK. O.. June IS.
MACK.
a Nn,lonnl Union ConventlOu.

The Tribune thus replies to our sugges-
tion of a National Convention OF the Union
party :-r.l aif Fu-.-r. % ..........- -. ...t
THE Mem York Times suggests Nation
al Convention OF the Union party TO declare
afresh aud distinctlyits principles and pur-
poses. We do not object, though we can
4. not realize that any National Convention
can be needed while the State Conventions
are speaking out so frequently, so frankly
and SO nobly. What does the Times think
= of their ulterances, especially those just
listened to from Vermont and Maine 7"
The "utterancesn referred t are very good
/. Of their kind, very good as defining the po-
litieal positions of the Statesconcerned, but
we do not quite see how they answer the
purpose or perform the functions of Ma
|. iiondL Convention of the Union party. No
one, we presume, ever doubted that Ver-
montana Maine were thoroughly "Radical'
In their political sentiments. Both are In
favor of forcing universal negro suffrage
upon the Southern States as condition of
admitting them TO representation, and both
undoubtedly prefer to exclude the South
wholly from taking part in the National
Government until such laws may be
passed and such constitutional amendments
+ secured as will render its participation of
no particular consequence. Probably YER
National Union Convention than the Trib-
une does, and all the New England States,
aud possibly some others, share in this feel
ing also. Being thoroughly sectional in
their principles, sentiments aud sympa-
thes, they unquestiUnably prefer making
laws for the whole country themselves to
allowing the Southern portion OF 1t to have
any voice or vote in the matter. ...-.s .
We do not think it quite clear that all the
States of the Union share in this feeling, or
that the Union party would be quite safe In
thus standing before the country on a
strictly sectional platform. ludeed, un-
less we are greatly mistaken, that party
runs considerable risk of losing its asren-
dancy in several of the most powerful
of the Northern States by persisTing III
such an attitude. We do not believe
those who have its permanent interests
most at heart are in favor of excluding
all the Southern States from all share in its
councils or in its action. Now that the war
is over and slavery forever abolished, there
is no reason why the Union party should
be restricted in its efforts to promote the
public welfare to one section OF the coun-
try more than another. While the war
lasted it was of necessity sectional In Its
organization and in its operations. But
this necessity exists no longer, and the
sooner it can get rid of its sectional char
acter the better. Sectionalism is always an
element of weakness to any party, and when
there is evidently no necessity for 1t, SOON
er or later it will prove an element of de-
cay and death. No attempt to establish the
permanent political supremacy of one Sec
tion over another, and to reduce any sec
tion to a condition of inferiority and de-
pendence upon any other, can ever sue
ceed. The spirit and temper of the Amer
ican people are thoroughly national, and
they will give their support to the politi-
cal party which best represents and is most
thoroughly pervaded by this national
spirit.
1t seems that National Convention of
such Union men as share this feeling and
seek the welfare of the whole Union, in
stead of the sectional ascendancy of any
part of it, could not fail to produce
wholesome effect upon the public mind,
and lead to results of importance to the
whole country.-Ne,o York Times (Repub).