The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1866-03-10
e eemmiteee. unl be 8 folIows;
TINE 0 4

EkME Il WONDERS.
Il is curious to observe at times the
startling inconsistency betrayed by Abo-
.f6qn leaders and Abolition organs. Let
a.person but keep a record of their Ian
gaage sud expressions for a few years or
even a few months, and he viii discover
that rot only do they lean to every point
Of The political compass, but that not I'M
Heqaently they double on their own tracks,
and soW advocate and endorse what only
nshort time before they denounced as
treason, and vice versa.
There Is a striking illustration of this
ghrng Inconsistency now before us in the
case Of the 0regonian. That journal has
always beencpposed to Democracy. Since
the opening Of the war it has been owned
BY the same person, controlled by the
same organisation. It has followed the
fortunes and stood by the chief leaders of.
the Abolition party, from the day of Lin
coin FIRST inauguration in 1861, down to.
the advent Of Andrew johnson to the
Presidency and it has until recently sus-
tanned Mr.. johnson.
Since the veto Of the F~reednsen's Blu
reau bin By the President, however, the
r0regonian has come out in bitter hostility
TO that act of Mr.. Johnson's, and de-
nopneed him IN unmeasured terms for his
conservative course. The foremost
9~saaerbfEhe Radicals is Senator Sumner.
He 5 the parent or guardian of nearly
every Radical measure or theory of the
day, and this Vetoed bin was a pet meas
ars IF his. He stands, then, as the most
eonspicao~ pe<soaage IN open antago-
nIsm 70 the President, IS the recognized
spokesman Of the Radicals. With the
full knowledge of the exact attitude of
these tuosmen before It, the Oregonian
now sustains Sumner and opposes John
son. Now, let Us refer to the past record
of that paper with reference to its posi-
ton on mol only the Radical and Con-.
AFvadve wings of It's party, but also to It's
views ii regard to these very two leaders,
Senator Sumner and Andrew johnson.
the 0regenian of January 10, 1862,
We fad Che following.
Which Is the loyal man, johnson OF
Samner7
tI would not be personal, but an Adolf
ZIONIST + as much a Seeessionist as any 70
Be found IN Een1h Carolina. n1Andrew
johnson.
The Abolifionists need no defence from
me- It Is to their praise, destined to ell an
immortal page, that from the beginning they
saw the true character of slavery, and warn
ed their country against its threatening DOM
maHon. Through them the fires Of Liberty
have been keps alive In the United States
1Sumner.
We have never believed in the
slave doctrines Of Mr.. Sumner. But we do
believe sBith Andrew johnson, that IN this
rebellion the Abolitionists have been as much
Seeeaionists Is any 10 be found IN South
Carolina Both we're for breaking up the
8nion-bolitio1iEa, that the free States
might be free natzon the Seeessionists,
that tie South might Be s nation whose in
etitutioas should be based N slavery.
The Union party, made up Of Republicans
ana Democrats, On the contrary, are for the
s~eShffnuanceo of The Union and Il IA the
contest e secafe this, slavery is used against
say with Andrew johnson, that
The Union and Governmenk are worth more
than slavery.
Here the identical question of choice
bstkeenaS zmusr the Radical and Andrew
Tohns6a ne Conservative is plainly sub
m;fted and the 0regonian decides in ia
vor Of johnson. A comparatively brief
time has elapsed Exactly the same issues
IN point Of principle, with precisely the
same champion to each, are again submit
It'd and the same paper; stiH protesting
the same party faith, and under the con-
shooff the Ame man, now turns upon its
a5snpastfee6fd backslides from its y
words spis npop is own utteranees, and
approves sMmm tie doctrines it be-.
6e5bced aud deuopnces the man
a1aths aostrine i before approved.
Yet ths oregoniah is just % steadfast,
and can present IS clear and consistent
p fseefd a. any of its 8clF
pR nsmpozeFIes. The truth is, the
sezgs has neither honesty
nor oonzteReg; t IS not founded upon
atsde 70 FasiplsA lisa parts led
ent and INMATES, Of dema-
gognes and sshsmilg politicians, and Of
Fpam p~tQpanndiats Of negroism
81 &AZ#- *
Prs af TO 1ethe especial shempi
ons Of the doctrine Of State Rights they