Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-01-09
NOTABLE.

The New York Tribune in its review of
Mr.. BucHASAS's publication, says: eff
Mr.. DOUGLAS had been elected President in
1856, he probably would have postponed the
irrepressible conflict twenty years"
At that date, thelate Presidentof the United
States, and the presentSecretary of State, had
notannounced that the conflict" between the
sections was irrepressible." There WAS a
conflict in progress, and had been for years.
The efforts Of good and conservative men in
both sections, had been put forth for the pur-
pose of preventing it from assuming an ir-
repressible" character; and the same class
of men continued to labor for that end, even
until the conflict became one Of arms. We
are particular in regard to date, for it will
be remembered that il was in the year 1858,
that both Of these gentlemen proclaimed that
the "conhict" was irrepressible." The
peculiar friends of each of them have con-
tended for the doubtful honor of priority in
regard TO this utterance, but that is matter
which does not concern our present purpose.
Thetwow words, to reflective minds, even at the
time Of their delivery, conveyed volume of
meaning volume which has since been
unrolled with every leaf stained with blood.
This the whole world knows. Whether they
were first uttered by Mr.. LINCOLN in Hi
nois, or by Mr.. SEWARD at Cleveland, Ohio,
is question of biographical interest merely.
We notice this sentence only to make the
remark that, if Mr. DoUGhAs, or Mr.. BELL,
or even Mr.. BREcKINRIDeE, had been elect
time sred by the e"f Tribune -' rey;ewer-,he
dreadful conflict" might not only have been
postponed for twenty years. but indefinitely
perhaps; and, possibly, even prevented alto
gether. The very statement, by men SO high
in position, that the conflict" was "irrepres-
sible;" that it was compelled to continue
until one or the other side should recede
that it had arrived at that point at which no
human agency could arrest or suppress it
that not even the Constitution of the United
States was to be consulted as to its bearings
or direction, operated powerfully to heighten
and intensity the conflict, and to convert a
peaceful difference of opinion into a bloody
question to be decided at the point of the
sword.
This is matter now properly belonging
to the portfolio of the historian. We prefer
to confine ourselves to the issues of the living
present, and do whatever we can to repair
the consequences of the terrible conflict pre-
saged in 1858, by Mr.. LINCOLN and Mr..
SEWARD, and which the man of the Tribune
thinks, as do we, might have been postponed
or ayerted by the election of different men,
and the adoption of wiser counsels. The
lamp of experience, however, is safe guide,
and it does no harm to cast a retrospective
glance, and note salient fact, il it can be
turned to profit for the future. Upon this
hint we speak, and say that, while We are
not respondent as to the future of the coun-
try; and that we do not design to arraign the
living, or assail the dead, for what is past,
we, nevertheless, would have more cheer
ing prospect, if the able reviewer from whom
we quote, who writes so aippantly in criti-
cism of Mr.. BUCHANAN, would but "reck his
own rede." If the tongues and pens
of the leading men of the Northern
States - the triumphant party to the
conflict, which, though successful in it. if
they be true philanthropists and patriots,
they must still regret-will, in future, en-
deavor to teach their people moderation and
fairness, and justice; if they will restrain
the malevolence of faction; inculcate pro-
per regard for the Constitutional rights of
all their fellow-citizens; and learn wisdom
from the past, not only may the wounds of
the recent conflict be salved to perfect heal
ing, but the mind and temper of this people
be so instructed and directed, that like ca
lamities may be avoided in the future. So
mote it be.