The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1883-10-31
THE TRUE INWARDNEss OF 1T.


The Republican speakers and newspapers
have always charged that the Democratic
party has been opposed to comforting any
rights upon the colered people. That they
alone are entitled to all the glory OF crnsh
ing the Rebellion and setting the negroes
free. AS general rule the colored people
have believed this, and were thoughtlessly
convinced that the Republicans were their
true and obedient friends. The Democratic
orators and papers have denied all OF the
above charges showing that there were more
Democrats in the Union Army than Repub-
cans-showing by Statistics that if every man
that voted for Mr.. Lincoln in 1860 had gone
into the army it would not have furnished half
enough to put down the Rebellion, while
the fact that various Democratic Southern
States notably Kentucky had furnished more
soldiers for the Union Army than the Rebel
Army. Further citing the facts that the
most distinguished Generals OF the Union
Army were Democrats, to-wit.: Generals
Hancock, Mcclellan, Slocum, Rosercrans.
SLOVENIAN, Rousseau, Palmer, JEFF @. Davis
and hosts of others. But for the sake of
argument we will admit that no Democrat
who went into the Army had anything
to do with putting down the Rebellion or free
ing the colored man. We will alss admit
that Democratic members of the House and
Senate both spoke and voted against the pas
sage of the civil rights bill. not that they
were opposed to the colored people being
protected in their civil rights, but they
thought it was not constitutional.
If the colored people have lost any of their
civil rights under the late decision of the
United States Courts, has any Democrat had
anything to do with it? The decision was
made by Republican Court. the opinion
delivered by that high apostle of Radicalism
and truly loyal man, Judas Iscariot Bradley.
1t is family fight. All that the Demo-
cratic party is required to do is to stand
aside and see the salvation of the Lord.
Mr.. Harrison in his speech the other night
very squarelv said that the decision was
right as a legal proposition, not that we were
merely to live because the Court of last resort
had so decided, but he said it was the law
and sound in principle. Mr.. Harrison is sup
posed to be a great lawyer. If that was his
| honest opinion, why has he not said
so long ago? The reason is perfectly plain.
| Harrison and all the great leaders OF the
Republican party knew at the time OF the pass
| age of the bill that it was unconstitutional,
| and that the Democrats were opposed to it for
| that reason only, but they were determined to
| deceive the colored man and hold him close
TO his allegiance to the 6. o. T. p, They knew
| that it would be years before the United
| States Court would pass upon the DILL. Such
| great leaders of the Republican party as
| Greedy, Sumner, Chase, Trumbull, Julien
and others whom the coloFed people had
looked up to had left the Republican party
but short time before the passage of the
| civil rights bill; they were alarmed about
, their eolored voters. but they must get mp
some measure to convince the colored man
how well thew loved him. The Republican
party passed the civil rights bill, we'll know
| ing at the time that it was unconstitutional
and now such men as Harrison and Peelle
ostensibly endorse it by saying that
| the decision is right. When will the colored
| men of this country learn that the Republic
can party care nothing about them further
than to use them as voting machines? Ii we
are not mistaken in the colored voter he will
resent this insult and in the future vote as he
sees proper and not in the interest of the
party that has persistently used him and at
the same time deserted him. II the colored
man owes his liberty aud right of suffrage to
the Republican party (which we deny) they
have paid the debt hundred times and they
have kept them in power for the last ten
years, and there is not three States in this
Union that they can carry without the
colored vote,