The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1867-04-27
Under Which Kings

+ & = >
$ The New York Times and the New York
World are carving on tnelr dispute ABOUT
.Le party advances the south would be likely
| to make If restored to the Union. The argu-
ment of the Times is, that the democratic par
ty of the north enticed the south into REBEL
ion, by the promise ofsupport, and when they
did rel BEL deserted them. Therefore the Times
says the south is going to desert the demo
cratic party. The World is engaged in pro-
wing, or trying to prove, that the democratic
party is not guilty of the imputation, but was
always, III its organization, and particularly
| in its candidates, and in the election of 1860,
opposed to secession, and when secession
came, threw itself into the field to put it down
by arms but was always the truest friend OF
the southern people, and Is now their only
friend.
This encounter of party organs with each
other resembles that of the knights in the old
legend, who ran deadly bet against each
other about the color of shield-which was
of two colors-each of them only saw his own
side. There is great deal of what is true,
or seems to be true, in what is said ON both
sides, but neither states the whole of the
question, and it would not really matter
| much if both did. They both prove too much
| for themselves, and too little for the object
each is laboring for.
The color of truth in what the Times says,
is that the doctrine of state rights and the
theory of state sovereignty, out of which Sc
cession was deducted by the south, as q con-
stitutional remedy, were the doctrine and
theory without which the democratic party
never had principle at all. That this was
| a union of states under federal constitution,
and not a nation, by the consolidation of the
states, into one sovereignty, was the doctrine
of for off ho tio rtc md ~
nearlyevery man who had heen leader among
| them and has been protested in every pub
| lie declaration of principles they ever made.
When the Times undertakes to deduce from
| this, that the democratic party entlced the
| south to appeal to arms, it overshoots the
| mark, for no considerable portion of that par
| ty ever advised, or promised aid to such
mode of enforcing disputed doctrine. And
| when it reasons, that the northern democrats
| who maintain state rights principles short of
| supporting armed secession have so unpar-
| donably betrayed the south, as to be no long
| er entitled to confidence, it is conveniently
| forgetful and strangely illogical.
| The men of the democratic party of 1860
| 81, who most openly attached themselves to
| the southern side and most earnestly encour-
aged them IN their objects, were in 1923
and the most relentless, vindictive and
| bloodthirsty among the war republicans
Types of this class are Butler and Bancroft
| of Massachusetts, d. S. Dickinson and Ire
maine of New York, Tod of Ohio, and Logan
| of Illinois, who did entice the south into re-
] sistance, and were afterwards the most raw
| enous for their blood. These men then and
| therefore quilted the democratic party which,
with all its shortcomings, held up a continu-
| ed but suspended respect for old construc-
| tions of the constitution, and protested to de-
l nioro nal war
| great rights to be reclaimed and reasserted.
Now, the strange logic of the Times is, that
-epugnance to their betrayers will lead the
u''ern people to discard the democratic
parry, %-'eh those men Abandoned, and con-
sor. Win 'h@ republican party, to which they
hau gone over. We must think the southern
people as simple as c. traveller who, having
a head WIND On his passap, across the bay,
prayed heaven it might chal.ue wba, he
was going back!
The World, however, seeing only north.
ern side of this question, at.smpts to
prove with great elaboration, that the, never
was any more sympathy with the sous.ern
people, on the question of secession, by tn,
northern democrats than by the northern re-
publicans, and expends good deal of fgur-
! ing to show that the Breckenridge party OF
1860 had no strength in the north, except in
Connecticut and Pennsylvania. True, it
was not a secession party but the Breckin-
ridge party south was full secession party,
! which Is an obvious non-sequitur; and be.
cause the Douglas party was at violent con-
tilct with the breckenridge party, therefore
the northern democrats are not chargeable
with any sympathy with the rebels This
was very good showing for the northern
side ofthe party question, at which the
! World was looking, but on the way it forgot
l ar at tn hat fbar i
for the assumption in the Times that there is
e soreness and resentment of betrayal in the
e south against the democratic party
; The Times is overshot by its mark, and
the World shoots wide
They agree in proving that the electors
who voted for Breckenridge in 1860, and
e those who, supporting Bell and Everett, new
srtheless sustained the war for secession.
think they have grounds of reproach and re
; sentiment against the democratic party be-
cause they might have preserved the Union
and prevented war by firmer union among
, themselves, and an earlier adherence to their
own protested principles. But it passes our
, understanding to discern in this any grounds
for the deduction by the Times, that between
two parties, one always and bitterly hostile,
and one that yields general approval of the
doctrines on which we rest our hopes of re-
stored rights, our wounded feelings must car.
} ry us in preference into the hostile camp.
But after all it is not question of sensi-
bility, of preference, or of preference for
names and organizations. All that trans
pired before the war, or during war, are with
us as though they had happened before the
deluge. We are afloat on the waters, and If
boat comes along on which we can ask for
dry seat until the rains are over, we are
not going to be very particular whether it is
commanded by Shem, Ham or Japhet. To
stop and quarrel about who was the best
boat builder before the food came down, is
stupidity and an anachronism. We do not
inquire what is the name of the boat. If a
good stout one comes by, which will take us
on and give us shelter, and carry us to the
port nearest which we desir. to go, we shall
| get on board, even though the name of dem
ocracy is on the stern, and the officers should
| not be the men we would put in command
| if we were in good circumstances enough to
'TIlsfoe