The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-01-19
WHY NOTe

The proposition to admit Confederate soldiers into the Union Veterans Homes | on equal terms naturally calls forth a
 n otest from The Kansas City Journal
 which concludes an editorial on the SUD- jest with these words:
 l If old soldiers who fought for the coun- | t1y were to unite in asking that the Con l federate veterans be. allowed 10 share i their honies, there might possibly De au excuse for violating this wholesome prlh- ciple. In the absence of such a peution' it would be grossly unjust to force upon them such an intimate association. It IS pleasing to note that most of the South- ern members of Congress oppose the measure Doubtless most of the ex-Con- federates themselves would object to II if consulted. Congressman DeArmond does not represent Southern sentiment in his ardent support of the bill. There is little probability that it will pass in either house.
 We doubt whether 'the old soldiers who fought for the Union would be the men who would object as seriously as would those, who did not fight at all. The veterans on both sidss have had enough of fighting and have learned to respect each other No doubt they would get along amicably together and would enjoy fighting their battles over and helping each other to recall the many stirring events in which they bore prominent parts and in which they met as brave men have met in deadly strife since the world was young There might be an occasional difference of opinion which
 would lead to a renewal of the war on a small scale, but these spats would make | no wounds which time and association | would not heal.
 As a matter of right and justice, there | is no good reason why the Confederates should not share on equal terms the bene'
 fits of these homes. They are established and maintained by the National Govern
 ment, and that is largely kept up by ! taxes paid by Southern people. Not only this, but our people have pad millions of dollars to pension those Union soldiers none of which comes back to the Confed- crates. It would be very small return for the money paid into the Federal treasury Dy our ptopic II eiiS
 homeless soldiers who wore the gray shouId be admitted into the homes.
 The assertion of The Journal that IL would be grossly unjust to the Union so,diers "to force upon them such inti- mate associationy is not sound conten- tion. The inference from this language is that the Union soldiers would be hu- initiated or injured by such association but that is not true, and we do not believe the Union veterans would look at II Ill that light. Those of them who met the .rav heroes on the field of battle well know that they would suffer no humiha- tion by associating with them on eaua' and intimate terms. No good Union sol dier feels that way.
 The Advertiser is not adVocatihs 'he ,neasure. by any means. We have not felt interest enough in it to examine the nroposed bill in detail. or to fully become acouainted with Southern sentiment on the subject, but we resent, as all good confederates should, the insinuation that admitting the Confederate veterans would be unjust. or that it would ia any manner be disagreeable to those "h0 fought on the other side