The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1878-09-19
VOL. VII.
JOHN HANCOCK AND HIS GAL
WESTON ASSAILANTS.

JOHN HANCOCK AND HIS GAL
WESTON AsSAILANTS.
A writer IN The Western, the popular
St. Louis magazine, says: ''h we
were now two peoples, separated by
the extension westward OF Mason's and
Dixon's line, each section, at this mo
ment, even if outward show of peace
continued, would be compelled to keep
on foot a standing army Of at least
300, 900 men. The palntenance OF
such force as peace measure would
exhaust both sections and lead lnevita-
blv to war, bloodier and mere lasting
and ruinous than that fratricidsl con-
flict that ended in 1865" Two CO.
existent unions would be wholly in
tolerable. We have thought, when
Thad Stevens and Ben Butler and the
Reconstruction committee" and the
Freedmen's Bureau reigned and raw
aged the South, that "one" union was
bad enough. 1.-TWO" would have du-
phcated every possible calamity. Two
great navies and two grand armies,
constituted OF black jannissaries, would
have made the two despotisms, ever
consolidated by retroactive pressure
unmixed and unendursble evils. Such
" ould have been inevitable results Of
Confederate success, and John Ham
cock refused to promote them. Surely
1t was no crime that he was prophet,
and surely If he saw clearly, In 1901,
that this was the best possible result, as
nobody now denies, of the war between
the States, he cannot be condemned for
hostility to those who ''precipitated"
this war. But il Hancock should not
be condemned for opposing secession
ism, even if he supposed its triumph
possible, how infinitely less reason for
his condemnation when he never
dreamed that the success of secession
ism was possiblel He spoke every
W here every day of the enormous losses
we must sustain. He talked OF the
death of myriads that must ensue. He
SAID the struggle would be more dead
Iy, a thousand fold, than the yellow
plague or cholera. He said we would
be beaten and subjugated, that our
property would be confiscated, our
morals undermined and our country
desolated. He believed all he said
and acted upon this faith. He refused
to participate in contest in which,
if we were victors, we would be en- :
shaved, and If vanquished, enslaved
and utterly impoverished. What crime
was there in this? He could not have
changed the result, and knew it.
On the contrary, he pursued q
course by which, when the war ended,
he was enabled to do infinite service to
the people of Texas. He stood when
the war closed just where he did when
it began. He was and remained 5
Democrat. He refused every proffel
of alliance made by Governor Hamil-
ton and other Republican leaders o.
the time. He was without one shadow
of turning. He steadfastly adhered
to principle, and, sipgularly enough
had the moral courage to obey his con
victions. If he were wiser than we
we should not be angry, and therefor
it is that we cannot comprehend feel
ings or reasons inducing little coteri
of violent partisans and original seces
sionists of G Galveston to publish mos
malevolent assault upon John Han
cock. They deny his Democracy, an
only because he was not a practices
secessionlst. If this be made the test
more than half the followers of tn
party must abandon its colorS
The party is not confined to thes
States of the South. VOORHEES,, THU
man, Cox, Baysrd and many like ther
are none the better or worse Demo
Gratis that they were neither theoreti
cal nor practical secessionists. e.
clude these from the party and a
North and South who followed then
and the party Is no more. 1t happene
that Hancock lived in the South. HI
convictions of right and duty wei
none the less binding, and believin
as he did and foreseeing inevitable re
suits of secession, as he thought he die
any other conduct on his part woul
have been reprehensibls to the la'
degree. II Hancock, in 1901, deeme
the CO. existence of two America
Unions neither possible nor desirable
as asserted by the St. LOUIS msgazir
above quoted, he would have been
traitor to his conscience if he hs
fought for Southern victory, and sur
ly his enemies in Galveston would NJ
insist that he should have fought
behalf of known inevitable defeat, an
thus for the irremediable ruin of Il
South.
This assault upon Judge Hancock
so wanting in the spirit of fairness an
in liberal and just thinking, that it cs
avail nothing among intelligent peop
and must, through its violence, ad
to his strength. Tits philosophy go
erned the district and State
would involve the ruin of Il
commonwealth. Since States ha'
been re-inyested with freedo
: and bSyonets are no more differenc'
L of 1901 are forgotten. If the yictC
rious North, whose sons We slaughte
y ed, can afford to forget the ''rebel
N crimes" surely the vanquished reb
=. n can confess Oblivion when Unioni
Il adheres to the creed of his Democrat
e youth and manhood asserting the san
e theories and purposes in his age, Al
81 81 never faithless to the party, save VIII
the party went to perdition and deaf
There are those, perhaps, who q
% forced to say that Hancock was wis
8 than We, and therefore we bate Hs