The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-05-11

G0npty VIII Tue EeQueSI I'll the M6IIOIldi
Association to narrate briefly events that
happened just previously, and subse-
quently to that ordinance, chiefly those
that occurred in North Carolina. But lit
tie attempt has been made to argue the
question upon it's merits, as it was be-
lieyed that a simple narration was al
that was desired. But | pray you to
hear me for little while STILL if l at
tempt some slight tribute to the Confeder-
ate soldier, a theme so near the hearts
of us all, but to which no one is fully
equal.
And first, in these days of centennial
memories and observance, it may be prof
liable to study the men, their motives and
deeds, of our first revolution, and to seek
to learn, by comparison, wherein, If at
all, we in our later revolution, differed
from them in act, or departed from their
teaching.
For what they believed to be good and
sufficient cause, our forefathers of the
Revolution resolved to sever their con-
nection with the mother country, and to
establish for themselves and their pos
terity a government IF their own, free
and independent, founded wholly on the
consent of the governed. Right nobly did
they carry out this resolve. Undismayed
by the magnitude of their undertakings,
they rose superior to hardships and trials,
painfully overcame all obstacles, cheer
fully faced all dangers and mastered all
opposition, until, at last, they attained
their end and we have inherited the fruits
of their labors. But mark you it has never
been said, or thought, that those men in
tended or wished, to injure, or compass
the destruction of the government from
which they had separated. Such superla-
tive nonsense was reserved for the wise
acres of today in their fiippant denuncia-
lions OF our acts, and intentions, in sep
arating ourselves from the government
of the United States. 1t would be quite
as correct and true to allege that our
ancestors in the Declaration of Indepen
dence desired and intended the overthrow
of the Government of Great Britain, as
that we, as is so often alleged, intended,
or could have effected, even if we had
so wished the destruction Of the United
States Government III withdrawing from
it. In both cases it was only intended
to establish separate government, leav-
ing the old one intact and undisturbed, to
be enjoyed by all who remained under
its provisions. Much stress has been
laid in this connection upon the well
known expression of Mr.. Lincoln in his
speech at Gettysburg: "A government of
the people, by the people, for the people,
so often and so gushingly quoted-the in
ference implied being the success of the
Confederate cause would prove the down
fall of such government Most lame and
impotent conclusion, for nothing can be
more true than that that was the
very kind of government that the Con-
federates SO earnestly strove to maintain,
and to establish separately, for them
selves. The expression, by the bye, was
not original with NJ. L!acoln, but had
been used by speakers and writer's since
1894.
We should, as we do, render to those
men of the olden time, love and thanks.
We recall their actions; cherish their
memories; but above all it is most in
cumbent upon us to preserve intact their
priceless legacy. We should ever bear
in mind that this inestimable inheritance
of self government is not wholly our own
1t is not to be bartered away, or for any
reason to be parted with. In it we have
but a life estate, and hold it in trust for
those who are to follow u.s. solemnly
pledged to transmit it to them in no whit
shorn of its fair proportions, but rather
if so it may be, with it's blood bought
privileges enlarged and extended. But if
the men of Kings Mountain, of Eutaw,
and of Yorktown had toiled in vain, if
their heroism had ended in disaster and
crushing defeat would it be right or nee
essary to yilify them for the gallant
struggle they made or to withhold adj
miration for their brave efforts in be-
half of what they believed to be their
right? / trow not! No voice is raised
in their condemnation, no one insinuates
a doubt of the purity of their intentions.
Why should it have been otherwise If the
issue had been different? Now, if beliefs
and actions of Southern people in our own
times were similar to those of our an
cestors of our first Revolution, will it be
any more than just to draw the same
conclusions, and to render like judgment
in the one case as in the other? What
was right and meritorious in the CONT
mental statesman and soldier cannot have
been wrong and blameworthy in the Con-
federate. What was honorable and pa
triotie in Richard Caswell and Cornelius
Harnett, in George Washington and
Francis Nash can hardly have been des
picable and traitorous in Jefferson Davis
or John w. Ellis, in Robert E. Lee, Chas.
Il. Fisher, VIM Pender or L. OBJ.
Branch, or in the men who followed them.
It was sad indeed that disagreements
politically between fellow countrymen
could not be adjusted without an appeal
to the sword Their divisions were politi-
cal only and had their origin in what
was honestly held to be right by both
parties and most conducive to the well
fare OF each They were, says an emf
nent writer, 1.-THE expression of political
principles concerning which parties and
sections had long been divided, and
which separated the best and Wisest of
our land long before their antagonism"
eliminated in warfare.
Both parties in the late war between
the States, were equally honest in their
belief of the right of their respective
causes, and neither should now question
the sincerity of the other. They who
fought with Jackson, or followed the
feather of Stuart, and all who sympa-
thized with them, must abide the arbt-
rament to which final appeal was made.
To quote again the same distinguished
writer: they are bound ito accept defeat
and its legitimate consequences in as
good faith as they would have accepted
victory; they are bound to obey the laws,
to fulfill to the letter every call of pa
triotic obligations All these we have