Shepherdstown register. [volume] (Shepherdstown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1849-1955, 1880-01-10
State Sovereignty The In,
,.a dictment.
NO. A..

In all their declarations puouc auu
private before the war, the abolitionists
asserted that there existed an ''irrepres-
sible conflict" between the slaveholding
and non slaveholding States. "That
the States could not exist part slave and
part free" These averments were car
| rried into their party platforms, [see res
olu,ious and printed speeches of that
party before the late secession. An
avowal that there existed at that time,
an irrepressible conflict between the
Northern and Southern States which
was tantimount to declaration OF war
by the abolitionist of the north against
the south; because conflict irrepressl-
bic is an issue made up, and inevitable,
so far as the declarant can make 1t 80.
The acts OF sovereign States where the
aboli,ionists had control, together with
their John Brown deeds of blood, both
| in Kansas and at Harper's Ferry,
amounted to deeds of war in conformity
with their uniform declarations. Being
| revolutionary in character, they. were
acts of rebellion. So l charge that the
abolition party were the true blue rebels
of 1861. And history will so record it
a hundred years hence. The sending OF
a war vessel to Fort Sumpter with a
pretext to provision the garrison after an
agreement had been made, to withdraw
the forces, was merely to shift the res
possibility. The aggressors needed sym
pathy and they went to be shot at, in
order that they might be considered as
defendeuts in their own aggression. Here
the abolitionists made direct applica-
ton of Mr.. Stewards irrepressible con-
fict doctrine; and equally an application
of the forcible interference with the SOW
ereignty OF State government. MIR.
Jefferson; the great apostle of American
democracy, says in his writing. "With
respect to our State and Federal gov
ernment, / do not think that their rela-
,ions are correctly understood by for
eigners, land might have added, by
some of owr people They generally
suppose The former 10 be subordinate
10 The later. But This is not the case" "
From his day to the present there has
been medesolne interference with the
reserved rights of the States by the con-
solidationists of the north. Cropping out
largely in the organization OF the sever
| al Territorial governments. And emil
nently SO in that OF Kansas, when in pro.
found peace. Munitions of men and
arms were subscribed in the abolition
Sunday theaters of the north-called
churches. Was that incipient war
Was it levyiug war against the power
and authority of the United States
And yet in the face OF all their acts OF
rebellion these hypocritical brawlers cry
out union, flag, best government, de-
when from their political cradle they
have always fomented hate TO the
Union. The flag and the constitution
Whoever heard Federalist, a Know
Nothing or an AbolitioniSt, speak well
of the uuion before the war. Why il
was then a "league with Hell" Theil
new born love for the Union does not
antidate its distinction by them, and by
their direct procuring. These charges
are facts as every politician knows who
remembers the bitter denuucations o
this party prior to the late war, under
all its nominal DISCUSSES. The election
of MIR. Lincoln was the result OF an ac
cident, as the cause of individual ambi
ton in the democratic party at time
when harmony and boundless prosperi
ty reigned in governmental affairs, Anc
Lincolns inauguration was simply tax
ing the field after the many declarations
of war; both in the words and deeds o.
his friends. Democratic statesmen see
ing the dabolical acts of disuDion pro
iecled by the abolitiouis,s, essayed te
oppose them and were elected from OF
flee; leaving the votaries Of erper'men
: full power to do with the ship OF State
as they pleased. Here vepgence began
and their intolerance knew no bounds
The eleven States of the South seced
ing, left the democratic party helpless &c
prserve the Federal constitution. And
soon its provisions, sacred as they were al
ways held by the school ofJeffersonians
gave way to new necessuHunder mill
tary despotism. Which neitEer regard:
the rights of persons or OF property
Habeas corpus was blotted ont. Judge
Giles, of the U. S. Court allowed the
writ in the case of John G. Mullen, Q
r minor, whom the commander at Fort
McHenry held under enlistment against
the will of the father, George Mullen,
and which writ was utterly disregarded
by the officer at the Fort,is an instance
From that out to the end of the abo,
lition war OF the Federal party in pow
er,agaiust the guaranteed sovereignty ol
the States, the writ of habeas corpus
was nullity. So with the right of prop
erty, early in the conflict personal prop.
erty xas con6scated because the owner
lived in a seeded State,or was demo
crat in an adbering State. But to even
allude to the acts of anarchy practiced
by the so-called defenders of the union
is enough to make every patriot sicken
at the thought. disclaim any desire to
keep alive sectional animosity by wri-
ting, these articles, but simply to repel
the unjust odium which the abolition
party is seeking to fasten on the demo
cratic party OF the South, by calling US
rebels, W hen the odium attaches to them.
We own, and it may be with regret
,ha, we were secessionists, bat rebels
never. We were not in n situation TO
be rebels, we were true to the constitu-
ton, both out and in the union, and,
to-day, 10 part Of the Republic is more
scrupulously faithful, and sincerely so.
TO the constitution than the southern