Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-10-30
eREAr FAcrs.

rebellion" ofsdozen years ago. We may
say that the brairs and leadership Of The
Slate from John Bell and Gus Henry down,
we're implicated either as active participants
or opsn sympathizers. The notable ex.
ceptlons to this general rule are almost
confined to East Tennessee-a section with
but few slaves. How far the lack of sym
patty with the South manifested by that
section, resulted from its lack Of direct in
terest in the slave question, is problem Of
human nature more curious perhaps than
profitable. But the great fact remains that
the bulk of the people Of the State went
into the Southern move, and are to-day
necessarily 'tex-Rebels." Z as.t ~. So
As an sex-Rebelv people, it is mere hui
man nature that we should have ''ex.Rebel"
leaders. There is no bond of blood or
friendship so strong as that produced by
suffering in common. The poor suffered,
and the rich suffered; the people suffered,
aud their leading men suffered; the rich as
well as the poor lost their sons as well as
slaves; fortunes melted in the heat OF the
strife. The officer sent the prt
vate into 10 danger that be did not share.
There is no tie in human nature so strong
as this community 10 suffering. All histo-
ry exempli6es it. We OF Tennessee are
but human. We have not sttsined the sub
limated d-blooiedness Aot Puritsnism;
we cannot gauge our stature or our spirit
by its Procrustean bed.
When the war closed, the Radical pro-
gramme was 70 deprive us of our natural
leaders-to exclude all ''precipitators" from
participation in Southern affairs. This poll
cy was carried ont, with what results the
world knows too well. Il was, practically,
denial Of self.governrnent to the South.
Our old and experienced public men being
os rxcized, all matters Of government could
only go into the hands of inferior and in
experienced rulers, vino with the best of
intentions would naturally make serious
blunders. Such was the best that could be
hoped from such policy. But the actual
result Of ostracizing the talent implicated
in rebellion, was to turn our local affairs
over to voracious carpet-bsggers and vim
dictivs scalawags. This is another great
fact. ~
Practically the Radical distinction be-
tween "leaaers" and people, left our peo-
pie ct the mercy of incompetents and
rogues. Mr.. Greeley rebuked this Radical
distinction when he bsiled JEFF. Davis.
The same Radical distinction between
"people" ard leaders" by whomsoever
set up now, can have hu. the sans inevita-
bic result.
The fealty of Tennessee to the Union
and its future to-day, is as unqueslioning
and unquestionable as that of any other
State from Maine to California. But we
do not profess to endorse all the individual
acts in the war record of Mr.. BrowIloE
or Mr.. Maynard, or any other leading
East Tennessee Unionist. We do not be-
lieve that Mr.. Greeley thus limits bis de-
mand for home rule in the South. We do
not believe B. Crate Brown or Lyman
Trumbull expect any such apotheosis of
Mr.. BrswnloW or Mr.. Maynard, or any
other Unionist.
We ere true to the Union, and cur lead
ers are. But if Mr.. Brownlow should
stump this State for office, demanding an
endorsement of his war record as a test of
our loyalty; if be sought to show that every
body else was wrong, and be alone was
right; if he said that ."ex-Rebels" could
with poor grace seek office under gov
eminent which they once tried to pull
down; if he sought to throw ell the blame
and guilt of war on Tennesses "leaders,"
when in truth these leaders tried TO the
last moment to keep the peace between
the Northern and Southern agitasors; if he
sought to foment discard between rich and
poor, between ex-oficar aud ex-private, be-
tween ex soldier aud civilian; if he abused
all who opposed his personal promotion as
unrepentant Rebels and Secessionists; if be
tore open again all the wounds of war, to
bleed afresh for his benefit; If in short at
this late day he persisted in his war policy
of making ''treaSon odiOus" and "traitors
infamous"-he would be doing precisely
what Mr.. johnson and his abettors are do
ing to-day, with exactly the same amount
of plausibility. Aud he would meet the
same overwhelming defeat that awaits Mr..
johnson next Tuesday.
The local issue to-dayin Tennessee is not
Unionism or secession. The issue is not
Mr.. Johnson's war record. We do not OPP
pose Mr.. johnson on any solitary incident
of his war record. We oppose him because
he opposes the Democracy. We oppose
him, because he and his most active abet-
tors are lzboring with might and main to
SKATER the Democracy into fragments.
We oppose him, because we are opposed to
the Rsiical rule that must follow the dis
ruption Of the Democracy. We oppose
him, because we hold the interests of the
whole people more precious than the pro-
motion of any one man, however great and
good he might be.
The issue forced on us is Democratic
disruption. If this issue has been misrep-
resented in the North or elsewhere, it has
been done by Mr.. JOhnson's friends, not
by us.