The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1866-05-31
s Republican Senator in Defense
Of tEsc President.

In the tnlted states senate, on triday,
May II, Senator Cowan, (republican. Of
Penns yIvania, delivered u most earnest,
forcible and eloquent speech, defending
the policy Of Andrew johnson, in reply to
the the threat OF Senator Howard, Of Mich
igan, that the course Of the President
would yet cause IAN uprising among the
Northern loyal masses
Cowsu's remark, il reply to Senator How
ard
Mr. PpEsIpENr-I think, in view Of
the danger which portends and which has
been alluded to by the honorable Senator
from Michigan, that this is 4 good time TO
be brave, and good time 10 say stout
things; and / am glad he has availed him-
self of the opportunity. am not so well
pleased that he has claimed for himself the
position of Leonidas and his Spartans in
the pass Of Thermopyle, in his fight
There the 800 stood against an invading
horde Of foreigners who sought Their coun~
try. Where : the Senator standing now?
Is he standing in the breach Ay. sir,
directly IN the breach; but It IS that
breach which the American people desire
to heal. He stands in that chasm which
they would bride over. lie stands in the
mouth OF that wound which they would
close and cicatrize. That IS his true posi-
ton. lie stands in the very breach which
prevents the union, the union for which
this war Of which lie has spoken was un>
dertaken. and fos which it was carried
through IN the manner in Yhich il was
carried through.
The Senator alleged that the Southern
States during the war were out Of the
Union. and he appealed to me as to wheth-
or they were not out OF the Union. Ad-
hitting for the noncc his postulate I rut
the question whas was the war lor? That
! he promised to answer. but that WAS what
+ he did not answer. It is the answer 10
that question for which the American pco-
nle look from that honorable Senator and
i those With whom ne acts. u hat was the
war for? IF the ordinances u secession
! If the rebellion, IF the war, II anything
which occurred during that time took The
/ II States in question oUt Of the Union,
what was the wer Cor? The Union maa
answers, It was for the purpose Of gport>
+ ing and and sustaining and restoring the
/ Union; If they We're out it was t. bring
them back; if theg were not out, it was 10
keep them in. las not that been the un-
+ ders5andidg OF the American people, with
the exception, perhaps, of = few extrem>
ists. Sir, that was the unanimous opiu>
! ION of the Congress OF the United States
in July, 1861. That was the almost unan-
imous expression of the opinion Of she 10y
al States ss 70 the object and purpose Of
the war. Was il false? Did that rcsolu,
ton assert falsehood, or was Il truth !?
| Did it assert the true intention Of the peo>
+. pie, or was IL 4 cover Cor design which
they choose to conceal, and which is only
developed now IN the face OF the people ?
IF the purpose was TO compel the South
ern people to fulfil their constitutional OBJ
legations. and to obey the laws Of the Union,
thea We had a perfect right 10 do It. Our
right was as perfect az that Of the
sheriff when he compels the feon to sur
render to him, and based upon precisely
the same gsound If, on the other hand.
III G war was for the purpose of c0nquering
those people, holding them as our yassals,
treat NJ them as scrfs and slaves, subject
to the domination OF one>half OF the
Union. then, | say, it was an outrage upon
all right, all authority, and had no warrant
anywh ere. either in the laws OF G. od or the
laws of man; and especially on the part Of
those who have descended from the sing
ers Of the declaration Of Independence, it
would have been an atrocity. Manifesto
tons of applause in the galleries.
The presiding officer (Mr Pomeroy in
the chair.) Order must be observed in the
galleries
Mr.. Cowan-IIow did we justify our
selves in the first revolution What did
We say to the mother country then and
there That every community, that every
people had the right to choose their own
form Of government. | hayo heard tie
declaration Of independence quoted here a
thousand tines over to establish absurd
ties which it was never intended to es-
tablish; but here is great historical fact
that no man dare deny; aud that is, that
the American revolution was based upon
the rights of people to govern them
selves, and that no body else had = right
derived from heaven. If they had the
right, whence did they derive 1t From
the genllcman's higher law of force ? And
then talk about standing in the pass OF
Thormopyle. and talk about building
monuments there
They fell devoted, but undviug;
The very gale their names seemed -ighing
The wat ers murmured of their name
The woods wcrs peoped with th cir fame
The silent lar, lone and gray
Claimed kindered with their sacred claw"
Why. sir, 1t is to desccrate that which has
been sacred for 1000 years to allude to
Thermopylr in such connection. What
was the struggle Of Leonidas? That
Greece should govern Persia ? No: it
was to throw back the tide Of the Pcrsans.
who insisted, according to this higher law
of force, that the king Of kings. Xerxes.
had right to govern Greece, had right
to hold its people as conquered people
and its provinces as conquered provinces.
The law is supreme over the Americas
people, and it is to the law we bow. We
owe no allegiencc to Presidents or to