The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1871-01-26

Within my knowledge he IS one OF US
Mr.. Sumner certainly would not have
made such a declaration at such a time
and for such purpose unless he had IL 9
clearest conviction, based upon Eersona
knowledge. that Mr. Stanton was an abo
Itionist or the most vIrulent type, prepar
I'd to tread the constitution and the stat
ute book under his feet, and ready TO g
all lengths for the Subversion OF liberty an'l
Justice a--- l
There is another fact corroborating you
view, which you have net mentioned, but
of which YOU are fairly entitled to the ben
eft. When Mr.. Stanton went into the
war department, he immediately began t.
act with reckless disregard of his sworn
duty. He surrounded himself with the /
most loathsome miscreants, and used /
hem for the foulest purposes. Law, Jus
tice, and humanity were u terly outraged. |
Those who knew him as did, and heard |
the. perpetras Irs of such crimes only a |
month or two before. exercised the char
uy which believeth in all things, and con
cluded he was moved by some headloLg |
impulse which had suddenly revolution |
zed his thoughts, feelings and principles
| Of action. But your proofs show that IN
the kindness of our construction we did
not give heed enough to the maxim, Ne
mo reLe7lte fttit teTpisSimlIS. Such depth
could not be reached by q single plunge
The integrity Of his moral nature must
have pfeviously undergone that gradual
process ofdecomposition which could re
suit only from long and sympathetic as
sociation with the enemies of the consti-
| ton.
On the whole, it must be admitted that
| you have made but this part of your case.
| With democrats he was a democrat, en-
/ joying their confidence and taking their
4 favors, while he caused it to be well un
/ derstood among men of your school IN
morals and politics" that his devotion to
the democracy was entirely simulated.
1t is now also clear beyond doubt that to
southern men he avowed himself full
blooded secessionist The testimony of
Governor Brown to that effect is as good
as any that you have produced to prove
him an abolItiCnist, and you have made
The fact so probable IN itself that very
slight proof would be sufficient to estab-
lish it. a-.- --
Is not my conclusion a fair one from the
premises, that this is the most marvel
Ous'' imposture on record2 Does the his
tory of The world hold on all of its pages of
wonders another case in which man has
raised himself to the highest public en-
ployments under different parties of dia-
metrically opposite and hostile principles
by making simultaneous professions of f.
deity to both ofthem? Do not mention
Sunderland for his hypocrisy gained him
( nothing nor Talleyrand, for he was
merely trimmer; nor Benedict ArpolA.
for he acted his double part only during a
few months, and closed it with lgnomin-l
ious failure. To6nd parallel, you must
90 to another scene of action, and a far
lower line of life. Jonathan Wild for
twenty years imposed himself on the
London police as an honest and q most
jealous friend ofjustiee, pretended to as
!, sist the officers in their business, and shar-
ed richly in their rewards; but during all
: that time he was the adviser, the guide,
philosopher and friend" of the principal
; thieves in the city. and to them he con-
: stantly betrayed the measures taken by
the public althorities for the preservation
of order and law.
live are directly at issue upon the
r question whether or not Mr.. Stanton adj
vised President Buchananj before his ap-
} lpointment as attorney general, that war
' might be legally made against the states,
} and the people thereof, in which ordlnan-
e ces of secession had been passed. by the
, of eoercing them to remain in the. Union.
: You say he was sent for by the President
and gave that advice, accompanied by an
? argument in writing which was 80 convin-
cling that it was inserted in the first draft
' of the message, but afterwards stricken
, iout. No such paper being in existence
E and Mr.. Buchanan as well as Mr.. Stan
i ton being dead, your allegation Is easily
j llmade; if It be true, it is harder still d
e disproye. The evidence you produce j.
q Mr., Dawes statement that Mr.. StantnE
o told him So l say nothing about the
l danger of relying on the accuracy of {
y conversation reproduced from mere Tecol
t lection, after SO long time; but answer
y that it is not true, for the following rea
y sons:
E l. Mr.. Buchanan made it rule never
: to seek advice from outsiders on legal ques
i tions When he was in doubt, he took th'
i opinions of those who were officially re-
/ spOusible for their correctness. He ha'
d no kitchen cabinet -o, .-a g..
d 2. If he had made this an exceptional
n case, and taken Mr.. Stanton into his coun
is sells by the back stairs. and if Mr. Stanton
had furnished him with. q paper which pro
duced conviction OBJ his mind that all n
I constitutional advisers were wrong, b
would most certainly have sbownltto the1
or told them oft. . e---1 --5' e
10 g. Mr.. Stanton was a lawyer of un
le doubted ability, and the absurd opinio
IN which you attribute to him could not hav
J, found a Judgement in his mind, even fc
y one moment.
le 4. If he had really entertained such
ID notion, and desired in good faith to impre!
le ] it upon the administration, ne would Nc
" / Il think he could not) have concealed 4
from me- 1t would have been contrary
d the whole tenor of his behavior IN thoi
I'd days, and what is more, very much againi
p his own interest.
p 5. He did express views exactly the o.
q posite Of those which you say he urged al
On on the President. He endorsed the oPll
f. ion which gave on the 10th of Neveu
n' Der, 1866, in extravagant terms OF. apprt
ne baton. adhered too steadily to the doetril
q OF the annual message, and when require
II officially to pronounee upon. the speci
as message of January, 1861. he gave his COZ
ay currence heartily, strongly and uneqWv!
nd cally, In all the discussions upon Il
lr- subject, be did not once intimate that the
ig- was, or ever had been, the slightest dItte
= ence between him and the other membe
m OF. the administration. Do you mean
as- say that This was meresham Was he
or utterly dovoidef all sinceFlty. honor, a
hls truth. that he=gava- the whole weight
ant his Infinenceand power to the support oi
III doctrine which he believed TO be not on
false but pernieions? If he was such
et knave AS that then tell me what rehan
tn can be placed on any statement be M
Id have made to Mr. paWes
at ETfI-pid be bstFay tho Buchanan q
lei- ministration while.tie vas aIaember of
!. Was he false to the principles that he pl
DR.. tended TO believe inn Was he treacheroU
he Iyengaged with you in trying 70 defe
hat the measures he was trusted to supper
on Did he aid and strengthen and assist y
But in your efforts 70 hlackeH therepu utation
m his associates and friends? Before tht
ing questions are answered let. 1s.. look foI
,oet moment at the situation we were in.
80 PRESIDENT BUCHANAN VIETICATEp
q Mrs Buchanan vas -oompassed round
cal, all sides with nnous diffeulties and dang
Mr.. than any other public man in this count
5 be ever encountered. The party which ele
ade ed him was utterly ronfedl; Its force v
est wasted by division. its heart broken