The Iowa plain dealer. [volume] (New Oregon, Howard County, Iowa) 1867-1895, 1868-02-28
EdiiOrial Correspondence.

recc nstructionists to travel. The
first round in the ladder has broke.
down from it's own weight. Onl,
$50 white black-men could be founl
to vote for the black -and-tan con.
stitution that Alabama negroes sub
mittcd to the people Of that state,
and we are told by the reliable
gentleman Of that, section, thai
they were all candidates for some
town or county Office. In Other
words the hybrid, sired by north.
ern congress, and finding maternit,
through the medium Of southern
wenab, has been r>pudiatcd by the
negroes themselves by over IL, ,OO(
majority. The offsprings Of this un
natural union is a dead mule and irs
parents mourn. '@@ Al an ..'"@
Tho correspondence between USE
LESS Grant and the President, sup
ported as the President is by five
members of his cabinet upon the
q lestion of veracity tells the world
that Grants middle name is srULr-
IFIER. 1t is not Grant the soldier,
or Grant in his statement Of popu-
lar sentiment in the South: nor the
Grant, who testified before the i'm
ehment c)mmittee that is now on
trial before the couatry.a 1t may
well be asked by the county, in what
different light his acts place him,
than Major Anderson would have
been in, had he on the first summon
| given UP thcposession of Fort Sump-
ter to Gen. Bcauregard;? 1t will be
in vain for him or his friends to at
tempt place the surrender Of the war
Office in any different light than ifit
had been any Of the numerous Mill
tary posts of the country thus given
up o"thc enemies Of the govern
mcnt, in violation Of express orders
from his Commander-in- Chief. Nor
would it have been any justi6ca,i IN
to such surrender, that it had been
made in obedience to any const:uc-
tion put upoa the lawfulness of the
order, by any attorney interested in
having his positive orders disobcyea.
Grants verbal promise to tic Pres
ilcnt, is Il no other earthly imprr-
tancc in The controversy, than 4
conviction of falschood out of the
mouths Of five unimpeachablc wit
nesscs, besides the President. The
facts arc that. he assumed the duties
of the Office as he would have obeyed
any other order of his military chief,
and surrendered thepost in violation
Of the express orders and known
wishes of his superior in command.
It does not matter whether the
words between him and his comman-
der were many or few, unless words
can be shown from the President
giving his assent to Grants aban
donment Of the post assigned him by
his military commander. ''a =.
The difference between Grant in
obedience to military orders, and
Grant in insubordinatien to them, is
tho difference fbetwcen Benedict
Arnold tho patriot and soldier, and
Arnold the traitor it is the differ
ence between Judas Iscarriot, a be-
loved disciple Of Christ, and Judas
a the betrayervd his Divine Mas
ter.
Grant in his new role is not only
piscsd in.a most unenviable, light,
but as military dictator under Bing-
ham $ new despotism bill. the follow
ing questions assume an Importance
only cqualled by their magnitude.
First.-If Gen. Grant neglccts
or refuses to execute the provisions
of this law, or if in their execution,
he should net in an oppressive and
cruel manner, to what !, tribunal
would he be amenda BILE for his NAL
feasanec? N tlhE II
Second. by the terms of
the new despotism bill, the Presi-
dent cannot interfere with him, can
he be tried by court-martial? and If
so, who can order, and who shall
constitute tho court as4eaat'
Third-Not being . civil officer,
can he be impeached ? and if SO. BY
whom, and before what court vas
Fourth.-If he cannot be tried
BY ANY. earthly tribunal, is he not
by such Law made DIcEAToR? 8
Eiftb. III he did not feel in. duty
bopad 30 ~. render 70 fhe Presidest
an 6Mse exclusively derived from
hins~hst assara nee we the peo-
pie, that he I would bs any more
res1tt 10 surrender q ~ tstf that they