Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1868-08-27

sanction IN any sense whatever. ((nlca
go-the war ailure-denunciation of al
F war measures as unconstitutional.) Fur
the. on you say: "Then did Lincoln speal
truly when he denounced the ordinance
! of secession as null aud void" / alway,
said the States had no right dc jurc to Sc
: cedei must the failure 10 verify the here
sy therefore unmake the circumstance tha
they were out in .fdcto, wherever and 6:
!, long as they could keep themselves out by
armies?
A man makes an assault with supposed
intent to kill. Canhe do this ia n.ftre? No
Then his lawyer says: "my client can not
be fined or bound over to keep the peac,
because man is not answerable for what
he has not done dc .jure. The law always
has forbidden such assaults and conse-
quently the will to commit it was in yege
null and void and my client is now dc jurt
as innocent a man as before he did the deed
in fact, he never committed it, because not
in .jurc and therefore the circumstance
ocular delusiop." II, as lawyer, you
once should succeed in making the jury be-
lieve that a certain horse, which the whole
community recognized as the property OF
old Mr.. Tom, but which as corpus dclic-
Ii was found in the hands of your client,
a notorious borscthief, was never stolen by
this, but that the arres,ing officer commit
ted robbery by taking the horse away
from your client; if you get your Client
clear and send the officer to the peniteniia-
ry, then shall certainly think that the ju-
ry consisted of those intelligent fellow -citi-
zens you represent and that am in error
with my theories because in opposition to
You.
You say: "The South admitted secession
a failure" (The South never did such a
thing but by the surrender the South Ger
tainly expressed that they could not main
tain it M. declares it success" (Yes, it
was a success so long as it was not fail
ure, and SO long as the Democrats main
tanned that the war of coercion on the part
of the North was failure
| Now, if these States were out of the
Union at the close of the war, they were
out at the beginning" Certainly. "Their
ordinances of secession were not null and
void as Lincoln in his inaugural address
declared" Yes, they were such de .jure. }
shut valid to all purposes and intents' (in
.facto as long as it lasted.) say therefore
consequently it does" (not "follow that
the constitution or compact between those
states was not ca priOra ment 10 be) permit
nent and unconditional (de jurc,) but
pretend that this compact was violated (in
JdctO) and against mutual consent. We
can. therefore. Con account of this violation
in .factO) not say that the constitution was
void from beginning (de jure) because IN
fdctoit turned out differently during four
years OF our history
Not granting you your premises, it is
useless TO follow your sophistry necessary
10 yonr conclusion: "The position taken
by NJ makes the war heinous crime, for
which the Republican party are guilty
(Do you mean, sir to impeach my charac.
ter by giving the public TO understand that
| was delegate to the Democratic Nation
al convention at Chicago in CT? l caution
you against such falsehood-I never was
in Chicago on Democratic business.
at shows that they waged the war for
purposes efsuhjugat;on" q Qdeclare il seems
to me that measures of snbjugation were
somewhat necessary; eide results of Nc
Clellon's campaign.) 1T was impossible
to wage II for the purpose Of preventing
secession" Certainly; Buchanan should
have done that "as they, the Republicans
acknowledged that right" OF secession?-
No, sir, we never recognized it dc jure,
but we dealt with it as assumed in .fdcto.)
But if these States were out ofthe Union,
(in jurc? No. sir; only in .fdcto) ''what
right have you, Mr.. NJ, 0he right OF er
ju'c,) "to force them to submit to thing
which you know to he wrong2" (Subju-
CATION to as a requirement of the
constitution is not wrong. Is the ar
rest of a criminal not a subjugation to the
law) 'If they had to secede" Ohey had
no right cr jurc pubtico but they assumed
right IN facto just like the Americans
did towards England } chad they not a
right to remain out of the Union?r Yes, il
they had the power IN fdcto. ''In wha'
manner have you changed the compact so
as TO make them amcnable?" The compact
was never changed in jarc but broken ii,
.fotcto against mutual consent and they
stand guilty Of contravention. "How can
you make these States territorial property
of the U. S.?' Very simple, this; the reb-
els had destroyed all the characteristics by
which their politically organized territories
were formerly States within the Union
When the United States overcame the con-
federation, which had destroyed the States
in the Union, there was nothingleft but The
territory, a land politically representing "o
t0butd rdsd" because all its Inhabitants
were traitors. The whole Federal ma
chinery was gone. the State govcrnmc nts'
because rebelliouE ones. broken, and no
civil or political government visible. A
territory without any such government and
with such people is no State. If the names
of the former States were retained, it was
because OF convenience and with view to
bring about organized bodies as near as
they were territorially before. Please show
me any particle of character by which you
would recognize them as States at the close
Of the war. They did not even surrender
as citizens OF this or that State, but as con-
fedcratcs. Slavery was gone, which,
as long as it existed, was an attribute
es their sovereignty as States. Where