The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1867-02-06
J. p. H. Russ.

declined being candidate IN 1901 LOT
the Convention, because could not and /
would not vote for the Ordinance OF seces-
sion. also declined being candidate Tor
the late Convention, after my friends had
presented my name, for the reason tnat1
knew that we should be require to reJolce |
and be exceedingly glad, that we were rob,
bed of our property; and, sir. my notions OF
honesty would not allow me to endorse ana
sanction the theft-the indiscriminate theft,
which has been perpetrated upon this peo-
Pile"
There is not one word of truth in the
above, except that Mr.. Russ regards the led
eral government as a common thief.
The Union party of Wake nominated its
candidates in February, 1851, in mass meet
ing. The candidates were George E. Badger,
Q. Busbee, and W. W. Holden. If Mr.. Russ
was named at the time by any one, we1lid
not hear of it. He received no votes in the
meeting. In May, 1861, the candidates Of
the Union party were George E. Badger, K.
P. Battle, and w. W. Holden. If MIR. Russ
was spoken of on this occasion as candi-
date, we dld not near OF IL.
Nor is it true that he was solicited to any
respectable extent to be candidate for the
late Convention. We remember distinctly
that he was in favor of those candidates who
were regarded as most radical, to wit, Messrs.
Pennington and Hood, both of whom
were defeated Mr. Russ had at that time
lucrative office; and though he might have
craved seat in the Convention, the Union
party thought that the Sheriffalty of the
County was sufficient to crafty even his APP
petite fol place. Therefore, he was not asked
by the party to be candidate.
But if Mr. Russ had been a candidate, and
had shown himself in his true colors at that
time, he would not have received one hun
dred votes in the County. Indeed, if he had
mounted the stump in August, 1865, and had
stated, as he does now, that the government
had "robbed him of his property, he would
have been instantly arrested and punished.
He would have deserved it then, and he de-
serves it now. His emotions of honesty :"
would not allow him to endorse the act eman-
cipating the slaves! Why, then, did he
seek and hold Office under the authority that
passed this act? He thought the govern
ment robber and common thief, and yet
he-this immaculate politician-asked for,
received, and held Office under that govern
ment. But, in addition to this, Mr. Russ
took the following oath in 1865, before he
was allowed to vote or hold Office:
81, J. P. Fl. Russ, of the County of Wake,
State of North Carolina, do solemily swear,
in presence of Almighty God, that will
henceforth faithfully support, protect and
defend the Constitution OF the United States
and the Union OF the States Hereunder; and
that will, in like manner, abide by and
faithfully support all laos and proclamatiOns
achich haze been made during the eaisting re.
bellion acih reference to the emancipation q
slaces. So help me God"
Now, fellow-citizens, behold this "honest
man with his "honest" opinions Mr.. Rus:
solemnly and voluntarily swore, in 1865, tina
he would "abide by and faithfully supper
all laws and proclamations under which
his slaves had been set free; but now he say
that the government, in thus emancipatins
the slaves, committed robbery and theft
What did he take that oath fore If he be
lieved the government had robbed him, wa!
he bound to endorse the robbery? Was hi
bound to swear that it was not robbery 3
but that, on the contrary, he would abide
by and faithfully support it." as a prope
and honest act2
One of two things is certain: He believed
l at that time either that the emancipation wal
robbery and theft, or that it was just ant
i proper. If he believed it robbery and thief
: at that time, the inference is clear that h,
L did violence to his conscience and took thu
; oath solely from love Of Office, for no other
= wise could he obtain Office; but if he ha
u changed since, the inference is equally clear
not only that he has trifed with his oath
but that he has thoroughly identified him
: self with secessionists and traitors.
No patriot or true man will use such Ian
guage about the government of his country
The man who uses such language is traitor
and deserves to have his property confscat
: ed and to be himself executed as traitor
: This man is double traitor. He has beer
false to his allegiance both in war ant
peace; and no better proof of the lenity ant
mercy OF the government could be offered
than the forbearance which it shows toward
!, = just such men as J. P. H. Russ. No wonde
/" he says heis mo unconditional Union man
L He was in 1865, but he is not now. els a
' defiant and rebellious, and as full of Treason
= as Pryor was when he had that first gu
fired at Fort Sumter. But the governmen
will handle all such characters. It will no
ask them what they think, or what they wan
in the work of reconstruction. It will dea
- with them as subjects, and, if necessary, a
: criminals.
= Up. Fl. Russ is not only false to his coun
: try, as his recorded speech proves, but he i
guilty of gross political fraud IN misrepre
: 'senting the Union people Of Wake. If h
had any sense of propriety, not to say shame
he would at once resign his seat. He A,o,o
heis misrepresenting his constituents.
We do not regard the abuse directed a
us by Mr.. Russ in his speech. The differ
= ence between Mr.. Russ and ourself is, he j
against the government, and we are uncon
y ditionally for it. We are too well know
y here and throughout the State, to be injure,