The Indianapolis journal., 1885-01-27

must be made shows that seces-
sicn was incubated months before the
Republican administration came into power,
and, not content to remain at home and cry
Hands of-let US alone!' the enginery of
war was set in motion, and peace was violated
by the South before any movement had been
made by the North. We still insist that the
rebellion was precipitated by disloyal and self
ish men, and that the South in general, and
Tennessee and North Carolina iH- particular,
were dragooned into the war for the establish
ment of slave aristocracy.
The Journal is ready to concede that there
are certain "deathless and indestructible prin-
ciples' pertaining to State rights, but insists
that the rebellion was not fought on that
principle, since none of the rights were threat
ened that the News and Courier now pleads in
defense of secession. It is significant fact,
and fatal to the argument of that paper, that
the emancipation of slavery was not under
taken except as war measure, and to cripple
the murderous South. The North, we admit,
was uncompromisingly hostile to slavery, but
it never threatened extraconstitutional
methods of getting rid of it. In other
words, the North was law-abiding, while
the South was aggressively hostile and
intent on setting up a separate government to
accommodate the ambitious men whose self
ishness exceeded their patriotism. The plea
that they event with their States" will not
answer. Davis plotted treason in the halls of
national legislation weeks before Mississippi
indorsed secession, and Lee was with the
South before Virginia joined the infamous
league. When Davis was at the head of civil
affairs at Richmond, and Lee led the Southern
army, each, doubtless, had attained the sum
of his ambition. The only element wanting
was success.
The News and Courier knows well enough
that it was not local self-government, as
principle, that precipitated the rebellion. The
South, as the North, has the same State
rights possessed before the war-no more no
fewer. The only thing established was that
rebellion, without better apology than selfish
ness and slavery, was crime that the people
of the United States could not and would not
tolerate. If that is one Of your ''deathless and
indestructible principles" we beg to inform
you that it is as dead as though it had never
been nursed into life. Not that the South
believes that it is dead, nor that the South
may not sometime wish to repeat the expert
ment; but that loyal people, North and South,
will see that the grave is never opened to call
it forth. The Journal has no quarrel with
the South any more than it has with the
North; but for men who do not realize that
the "indestructible principles" of rebellion
are dead, and who are not patriotic enough to
admit it, it has no sympathy. The South will
be better off when they shall have passed from
scenes of earth, let us hope to that laRf
where rebellion in defense Of organized and
hoary crime cannot succeed. AS for the
News and Courier, its argument in defense
of rebellion is in the shape of non sequitur.
1t might as well plead that the war made by
the South was right because of the deathless
and indestructible character of the Ten Com
mandments, which, it is generally believed,
had no part in the South's provocation to war.