The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1880-10-21


party, and by Gen. Hancock himself again in
his letter of acceptance? Who, who could be
found bold enough to go into either house of
Congress and introduce proposition to amend
the constitution of the United States SO as to
admit slavery2 Does anybody believe that
if such an insane idiot were to make
his appearance in that body, party could
be found that would pass it there2 And, il
1t should by any peradventure escape that
body, that three-fourths of the Legislatures of
the States of this Union would adopt it? 1t is
SO with secession. Who can imagine man
bold enough toN propose again, in the face of
all that has passed, to secede again from the
United States? The man whose nerves are
affrighted by such an argument as that would
find some calm and quiet In q good course of
delirium uemens.
An, but they say that the South will control
Hancock. They tried rather Intellectually once.
But that seems to make no difference to the
minds of some of our people. They do not
hesitate to say that they think the Democratic
party of the North will be governed by the
Democratic party of the South, or that sog-
ment of the party which lives in the South.
Why, stop and think moment. If you count
all the sixteen States who upheld the institu-
ton of slavery as the South, although but eleven
of them seeded from the Union-for West Yir-
ginia as State never seeded, but as a loyal
portion of a seeding State it Immediately or
ganized into q separate and Union-loving State,
and ought not to be classed with those who did
secede-Dut, If you count the sixteen States to-
gether, how many men in them all voted for
round numbers. How many in the North
voted for Tilden and Hendricks Pa, 2S4, 900.
But treat it fairly. The States that are to be
put under ban are certainly not those which
did not secede, and if you count up only the
voters in the eleven States which did secede
you have only l., ,084, 900 who voted for Tilden
and Hendricks, against 100000 in the other
States who voted for Tilden ard Hendricks.
viii the tail waggle the dog?
All but they say you must consider that these
men will be majority in Congress that they
have greater proportion of the representa-
tives in Congress- and that therefore they have
q majority in the caucus. Well, that is a yery
poor argument for them to make, because they
can relieve themselves on that subject in one
moment in the best way in the world, by voting
for Democratic nominees. In point of fact
the argument is only specious in appearance
and is Unsound in reality. There has been no
dictation and no control, and none need
be feared by the Democrats of the North They
are not of the class to fear control. But let us
see how stands the electoral vote. They say
that is solid against them. You take the eleven
seeded States and there are but ninety-five
electoral votes. You take the other five States
that did not secede, but which formerly had the
institution of slavery in them and they give 43
votes. New York 35, New Jersey 8, Indiana 15
Connecticut 6, and last, but by no means least
that State from which the sun rises over the
land.Maine Z. Ninety-ffve to 121 stands the
vote that is assured for Hancock.
Then they cry out that States rights will be
revived, and that is a bugaboo that seems to
alarm Republican children. States rights
What are States rights? In the sense that
States had right to secede from the Union
they need not fear the Democratic party, for
upon that subject, the Democratic party itself
was rent in twain and divided in 1860, and the
entire body of Northern Democrats stood as
straight upon that question as ever Republicans
did anywhere-and, ut the very time they were
doing it, Republicans all through the land were
insisting upon States rights. IA voice" And
staying at home.''l Yes, and staying at home.
States rights was so dear to then. then that they
wanted to stay in the States to defend them.
Do they mean that disloyalty means
fayoring secession as State right?
Indiana, it is said, to-day there are twenty
two Major Generals that fought in the Union
army stumping for Hancock, and all over this
land the veterans of the army are forming in
clubs for Hancock. Why, only here and there
few of the soldiers that remain Republicans
can be gathered to make q company of the
Boys in Blue, as they call them. 1t has been
shown by figures-I won't stop to repeat them
that very large proportion, If not half, of all
the soldiersifi the army, who enlisted in support
of the Union, were Of Democratic antecedents.
Gen. Butler said the other dav, in speech in
Massachusetts, that five-slxths of those he led
out were Democrats. But what is this cry of
States rights? What does it mean? States
rights There are no rights of the States which
are not the rights of the people of the States
There is nothing that the people are entitled
to here under the name of States rights
but what they are entitled to here under the
name of the people. There is no pretext on
tine part of anybody that the States can over
ride Justice and the law of the Federal Union,
the dignity, the majesty of the Federal constitu-
tIo iOI,f xvIi ha I,o
under it, except that protest which was set up
by our Republican friends before the Electoral
Commission, that the great seal of the State
was conclusive. Never was such use of State
rights made-except when it was claimed that
they could secede-as was made at that time
when it was insisted that the great seal of tho
State was protection and a shield for all sorts
of rascality. After that use of the old and ex-
ploded theory that the rights of the States or
the rights of the people of State could pre-
vail against the rights of the Union, 1 think
our Republican friends had better discontinue
talking about the Democratic party using States
rights in q dangerous way.
But, fellow-citizens, this question of section
alsm is not to be met by any of these cries.
We are not to be frightened by the theory Of
Southern claims, either. That has been much
used to alarm and terrify people. 1t is thor
oughly and perfectly exploded by very few
considerations. Gen. Hancock said it was
enough that he accepted the constitutional
amendments. They bar Southern claims ana
who is there to suppose in q serious moment
that the 3,200,0 900 of Democratic voters in the
North who voted for Tilden and Hendricks de-
sire to put their hands in their pockets to pay
men who represent nobody, and who have no
footing, no standing to make any claim? All
the Confederate debts provided that they were
contingent upon the issues of the war-they
were not due and payable until six months
after the recognition of the Confederate States.
Will it be claimed that the Democratic party
want to put their hands in their pockets and
hasten the day of payment2 And the cry that
there are claims in Congress which the Demo-
cratic party are anxious to pay is best met by
the record of the two parties on that subject.
Gen. Garfield himself has said more in Con-
gress in favor of these claims than any Demo
crat that ever spoke on that floor, and if any
one wants reference to the speech I will
give it.
Now what is meant by sectionalism2 What
is the aspect in which that presents itselfa ]
have only called attention to some of the less
important features of it as it seems to me.
What is it ? It is this: We are expected to
continue, under the Republican party, as un.
derstand them, for solong period as they can
maintain themselves in power by tive are ex-
pected to continue in hostility 20 the people OF
the South. The war is not to be done 80 long
as it is necessary for the Republican party tc
remain in power. The war is to continue with
out armies-a constant conflict of opinions, OF
sentiments, of feelings. The danger of this
course is manifest; antagonism begets recrim
ination, recrinination increases irritation, irri
tation leads to enmity, and enmity to hatred
and thus constantly the action and reaction Of
antagonizing sentiments increases the exasper
alton between the people. Such things lead tt
anarchy, to revolution, to war. 1t was long
ago announced by the fathers of this repub
lie that sectional parties could bring but ont
result. We need not search the records o
the history of other lands. We have seer
| in our own land the illustration of that danger
| We have seen in our own land sectionalism leaC
| to war. Doubtless with the example of tina
conflict in the memory of men there is no dan
ger in our day and generation of a renewed war
No man can fear that but when we enter OIL
take, a political mistake which becomes
crime VIXEN you look down the avenue of tn,
future and consider the generations that are t.
come. The political views of one generation
descend to the unhappy gosterity Of another