The Elk County advocate. [volume] (Ridgway, Pa.) 1868-1883, 1872-08-01
Greeley and Secession.

1t ls we'll Settleu tnat inan may w
convicted of crime by circunstantlai
evidence provided the circumstances
and their connection are of such char
acter as to leave his innocence wholly
inconsistent with their existence and
connection.
Was Horace Greeley a secessionist
during our late rebellion, or was he
loyal but cowardly? are questions that
now unbidden present themselves for
the consideration and discussion of all
alike, the ex-,ebel and the continuously
loyal.
Mr.. Greeley is to some extent his
toric character in our late struggle, as
much so in his sphere, and according 70
his capacity as jeff Davis. Much that
he has said has passed into history, and
hover much he and his friends may de-
sire that what he has said were blotted
out and no more remembered, yet they
are of record, and must so stand whether
honor or dishonor shall come upon the
author.
As journalist it becomes us, indeed
it is our duty, to state facts and leave
the public to draw conclusions. If from
the facts in the case it should appear
that MIR. Greeley was loyal but cowardly,
then it is evident that he was entirely
too dictatorial to those in posts of dan
ger and peril, where he dare not 20 him.
self. What right had Mr.. Greeley or
any other coward to dictate Extensively
to those who had periled life itself, to
say nothing of the sacrifice of all that
made lite dear, and the world desirable,
when he had not the courage to come
within the sound Of the clash of arms, oil
for single day endure the
priyations of the camp and field
And yet every soldier, and every
citizen knows that Horace Greeley
was the most inexorable grumbler anC
fault-fnder that lived north of Mason
and Dixon's line. He found fault will
the soldiers of all grades, from th'
private to the general commanding
because they refused to adopt visionar.
tactics and lines of operation existing
nowhere else but in the cowardly brail
Of "H. G." He found fault with tn
Congress, and the President becaus
they did not see fit to follow his politica
prescriptions, which so far as followe'
proved disastrous, and if continued
must have proved fatally so to the life O
the nation.
But was he a secessionist? If Sc
then he was the James of the nation
having a face for both sides of the lin
that determined the boundary betwee
LOYALTY and treason to the government
IF he was a secessionist, then we ca
account for the readiness Of his lei
handed dagger to strike covertly tn
fatal blow that should hasten the dool
of the best human government tn
sun ever shone upon.
As to whether Mr.. Greeley was
was not secessionist we will slmpl
state the facts with but little argumen
and leave the great national publ
North and South to render its verde
according to the law and the evideno
that judgment may be entered accor'
ingly. The facts in the case will Col
sist chiefly in what Mr.. Greeley hi
said and done, said and done too, at
time when from the memory OF the IL
ing il cannot be effaced, and under ci
cumstances that make his utterances an
doings as abiding as time.
On the 9th of November, 1860, Wht
treason was arming against the COVER
ment, Mr.. Greeley, as he supposed Ve'
wisely and very much like philOsoph