Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1866-10-22
The

Will the Bee show US the difference be-
tween George Washington and Robert E.
Leef Their acts were precisely alike. II
one was guilty Of perjury, why was not
the other s-Colusa Sun.
Did George Washington ever swear to
support the Constitution Of the United
Statess Yes. Did he ever violate that
oath by turning traitor and levying war
against the United States? No. Did
Robert E. Lee ever swear TO support the
Constitution Of the United Statsss Yes.
Did he ever violate that oath BY turning
traitor and levying war against the United
Ststess Yes. The difference is, that
Washington was q patriot, and Lee a per-
jured traitor.
George Washington helped to make the
Constitution, and fought to make md
sustain the Government-Lee fought to
tear both down.
But what the young Phidias. who drives
the Quill Of the Sun, means is, hat both
were rebels, and thus precisely alike. DID
George Washington ever swear to support
the British Constitution No. Did he
ever swear to support the CROWN Where
is the evidencef But admit that he had
taken that oath. There is . wide differ
ence between q Monarchy and a Repub-
lie, and as wide between rsbelling against
them. But the Sun wants to claim for
Lee that he was a revolutionist, and that
revolution is a right Of man so declared
by the Declaration of Independence. This
is a mistake-man has no right to rebel
sgsins, a government Of tho people like
ours. For the majority have the right
to govern, and to interpret the Consti-
tuition as against the minority. The
rebels claim that the North had violated
the spirit, if not the letter, Of the Con-
stitu,ion. but the Supreme Court never
said so. nor did = majority OF the South
ern people say 80. Stephens did not; on
the contrary, he eontended strenuously
that they had obeyed il TO the letter. Lee
did not say that the North had violated
the Constitution, nor invaded the rights
Of the South-he went with his State;
that was all he said. But even il the
| South had been unanimous IN declaring
| that the North had violated the compact,
il is no, the province Of the minority to
cous,rue the law for themselves. Our
Government, provides for an authoritative
declaration upon laws and actions.
The South dared not appeal to that
authority; they knew they would lose
their case. They knew they had no suti-
Glen, reason for rebellion or revolution;
they knew that they had lost power, and
they would not stay and submit to the
sway of the majority, ruling according to
the Constitution and laws. Now our
Government has embodied in the Consti-
tuition the full and only right Of revolu-
ton that exists, or can exist in q free Gov
ernmen, Once in four years We can have
q revolution according to law IN his Ma
ton. Every year in the States, il they so
elect. II there is a majority for q revolu-
ton, or a plurality even. they can effect a
peaceful change Of officers. A minority,
under the plurality rule, may change the
whole Administration. Less than a plu-
rali,y ought not to change q Government.
And IL they determine to, as the South
did. it is because they split upon our form
of Government, and will not stay under
the rule OF the majority. Thus they rebel
not alone against the majority and the
Government, but agains, the Republican
form OF Government. They must Of ne
cessi,y rebel in the interests Of despotism.
monarchy, oligarchy, or arissocracy. Or
to put the best possible face upon it, they
refuse TO submit to the majority and 90
| out. There is abundant evidence that the
South intended to subdue the North, and
did not wish simply to get away from the
majority. They thought they and their
allies were the best fighters, and il they
| could not rule by the ballot, they could
BY the bullet. We are aware that seces-
sionis,s say that we have no nation, and
,ha, the Constitution doe. not aItablish .
Government Of the United States that can
defend itself and subdue rebels; but that
is a mere dictum which no sane man ever
believed, and il has been very thoroughly
let out BY the war. And before any man
ever avows i, again, let him begin BY
proving that q part is greater than the
whole. The difference then is, that WASH
ing,on swore to support the Constitution
OF the United States and kept his oath.
Lee swore to support the Constitution OF
the United States, and broke his oath.
Washington rebelled against a monarchy,
unjust and oppressive. Lee against a
Government by the people thai had edu-
Gated and honored him, and ruled all her
citizens Justly and nobly. Washington
fought for liberty. Lee for slavery. Wash
ington had right, and truth. and God on
his side, and a reasonable ground Of sue
cess; Lee had wrong, and f%slsehood, and
the father Of lies, and no reasonable hope
of success on his side. Washington stands
in history ~personi6ed patriotism; Lee
stands ~personifed ingratitude, perfdy and
treason. Let them never be mentioned in
the same breath.-Sae. Bee.