The Portland daily press., 1866-04-14
The Original Disunionists.

O&@o&%4N>A
The artful dodge so often praeticed by sneak
thieves, of fjoning in the hue and cry, calling
stop, thief" louder than the loudest Of the
crowd, has been too frequently exposed to be
very successful at this time of day. 1t is no
matter OF wonder, that the Democratic press
snould endeavor to hide Its record during the
war. 10 say nothing of the merits of the case,
the stupidity of opposing the most popular
war ever waged, is now too palpably evident
to admit of dispute. The New York World
tries to escape from the obloquy which has
fastened upon itself and its party, by stigma
tizing the advocates of just and permanent
settlement of our national dificulties-the
same men who have upheld the national gov
ernment against the attacks of the World and
its allies for four years-as DIsUNIoNIsTs -
The Argus, a weak and timid echo of the
World, repeats, "Disunionistsp The trick
won't answer. The American people forget
very quickly, but not so quickly as that.
We have never thought it worth while to
defend the Republican party from this charge.
1t Is too preposterous to deserve moments
notice. The sore consciences of the Demo-
cratic blind guides are not so easy. We hap
pened to say the other day, in historical way,
that "the Argus during the whole war openly
advocated disunion," not dreaming of contra
diction, regarding the fact as settled and no
more to be disputed than the adherence of
Mr.. Jefferson Davis to the fortunes of the
Southern Confederacy. The Argu, politely
recalls our attention to the statement by cali
ing it falsehood, shameless, unscrupulous, a
Misrepresentation, untruthfui and unjust, and
after expending its stock of synonyms for
mendacity, wanders off into an unmannerly
inquiry who wrete the article in the Press,
as if that had anything to do with its merits
or dement's.
Now, why do the heathen rage? We have
before us the argus of Tuesday, April 18, 1851.
Here is what the argus said then:
A suspension of hostile movements may
doubtless be obtained on both sides until the
people can be directly consulted. And If it
shall then appear as the result, that they will
not agree to terms upon which free and slave
States can live together in peace, then LET A
PEACEFUL SEPARATION BE ARRANGED
Then every citizen will be bound to abide the
result. We should do 1t cheertally.
Ifthat doesn't mean disunion, we are con-
strained to say that peaceful separation
is something very different from what we had
supposed kind of Democratic union, per-
haps. There is enough of such material to
make choice very embarrassing, but we viii
call attention to but one point more. The
Portsmouth IN. H. States and Union, of the
oath April, 1858, said in plain words, "Of
course, if a sufficient sum of money is raised
to pay the exemption fees of all drafted men,
there win be no one to fight and there win be
a prospect ofa speedy close of the war-a
thing most earnestly to be desiredp The Ar
gus had not the hardihood to say its say so
openly, but here are its words on Monday, Ju-
ly 9, 1858:
The administration seeks to raise men by
law The totc Is fully complied trith and it
gets no men. These results will not be the
fault OF the citizens, but the fault of the law.
The animus OF the New Hampshire Copper
head and of his Maine confrere cannot be mis-
taken. Their childish hope was, that great
nation would stultify itself by voting through
its representatives in Congress to raise troops,
and then voting by towns to send money in
stead oftroopsl But if the war had ceased
then, should we have had union or disunion?
We have thus exhibited the argus openly
or covertly advocating disunion in 1851, and
again in 1858. But one change is needed In
the remark to which the argus takes excep-
tions. 1t is due to that cowardly sheet to
strike out the word openly The proposition
will then read, "The Argus during the whoss
,car adcocated disunionp Now wrigglel