The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-01-29
THERE WAS NO Rebellion.
1t Was War of Conquest on the Part of the
North, and of Resistance by the South


North, and of Resistance by the South.
Charleston News aud Courier.
1t were far better for the country of course
| II Mr. Boutelles resolution had Eever been of
Tered. If any cannon captured by United States
military or naval forces during the late war have
heretofore borne inscriptions designed to COM
nemorate the triumph of one side in that un-
nappy struggle, it was wholesome thought.
oy whomsoever conceived to obliterate the in
scrlptions, as it is wise and right to obiterate
the recollections of the struggle itself and of
the differences which led to it. If any
taoles existed in the Norfolk hayward
bearing the inscription, Destroyed by the Reb-
els it ought to have been removed long ago.
Such memorials answer no good purpose any
where in the United States. They are out of
place In the Union, if it is to be Union in aught
put name, and should be forever consigned to OBJ
ilvlon. Ii the dead were divided. the living are
reunited we hope and believe; and so hoping, so
oeilevlng, we may we'll strive together to put
away the few remaining hindrapces to perfect
reconciliation and mutual confidence and respect
Inc resolution will probably be pressed, how
ever, and II so it should be discussed upon its
merits and without reserve.
From the point of view of the Northern States,
the great struggle of 1860-65 was for the sup
preston OF rebellion, while the States which
seeded regarded it, and are compelled to regard
IL, as a war OF conquest waged by the Northern
States against the South. It was successful as
conquest, and because it was conquest, and
nothing more nor less. 1t was the law of the
sword, not the Constitution. that prevailed. The
southern States are in the Union to-day by the
power of the sword, and not by virtue Of the
Constitution of 1881 1t is not expected that the
Northern States will take this view of the war;
III this generation at least, and the South is con-
tent to hold to its opinions, without seeking
unnecessarily to force them upon others. But
the representatives of the people in the Congress
OF the United States, whether they come from
the North or from the South if they are loyal
10 the Constitution as it is, must not regard this
great country simply as two hostile sections held
together by military power. They cannot treat
the people OF one half of the country as pardoned
rebels who are neither trusted, nor respected
and who may be safely insulted at all tiEes, and
for all time. The Southern Congressman, at all
events, the men who fought under the confeder-
ate flag or who are the descendants of the men
VINO fought under it, must, in order to be sus-
tanned by their constituents, and in order to be
truly representative, maintain and assert
the view that the citizens of the South
ern States who fought in the Southern
army We're as much in the right and as truly
loyal, as the citizens of the Northern States who
fought in the Northern army. The North hon
ors and rewards, to day the Southern citizens
who because of their convictions, fought against
the Southern States; and it cannot consistently
refuse to recognize the force of the similar
vlet1ons In the case of those who fought in de-
Tense of their homes. 1t was a war Of principle
on both SIDES, and it is useless, and worse than
useless, to attempt to ignore this fact. 1t is an
insult and reproach to talk about a rebellion
which never existed, and no inscription or device
penetrating an historic lie should be allowed to
stand.
There is another view of the question, the
view that Mr.. Sumner took many years ago
when he proposed that tho names of the battles
won by the Northern troops over their fellow
citizens in the civil war should be removed from
the regimental colors of the army and from the
Army Register On account of his action he
was, indeed, censured by vote of the Massa-
chusetts Legislature but that vote was af ter
ward rescinded The patriotic position assumed
by Mr. Sumner was that no country should WISH
or can afford, to build monuments to commem-
crate the defeat of its own people, to perpetu-
ate in any way the victory of brother over broth
err. This is the position that should be taken by
the STuthern members of Congress; for if they
are not equal in every respect to every other
member OF Congress of their common country,
and to every citizen of that country, and if they
have not the same rights and privileges. then
they have no business in Congress and the South
ern States have no place in the Union.
1t is insulting and degrading to speak of the
contederates as rebels, or of any American citl-
zen as ex-rebel and pardoned traitor The peo-
pie of the Southern States are as loyal as the
people of the North and West. They never
were traitors rebels. They sought to estab-
hsh government of their own, and they bow to
the logic of force and accept the results in good
faith. They are deemed worthy to hold the
highest offices under the government, and they
are qualified, by the Constitution and laws, to
represent the Union at home or abroad They
cannot, therefore, consent to be branded as reb
els or to be treated as such, whether on the
floor OF Congress. or on bronze or IN marble.
Sumner was right. The highest patriotism in a
reunited country is that which bures early and
deep the eplthets and stings of the struggle, and,
without surrendering any honest convictions,
forgets all that is bitter and brutal in the past.