The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-01-22
Is TT SETTLEDs

There was no "war of the rebel lien" according to such high authority as the Senate of the United States. That body after an interesting debate. decided the other day that the words, rebel" and rebellion" are no more to be officially used by the govern ment. One of the best book defini- tions of rebellion is: War waged against a government by some part of it's subjects" and all know, or should know, that the war of 1s61-5. was not war of that kind. The Confederate soldiers were subjects of the Confed- eracy, if the term Subjects" is appli- cable to citizens of free government. At all events, they were not at that time subjects of the United States, and did not intend to be if hard fight ing could prevent it, whatever they may have become of late years.
 So, rebellion" being cut out, it is decided by the same Senatorial au- thority that the war shall be officially known as the civil war" but does that help matters much? There are some of us who are prepared to main- tain that there was nothing civil about 1 it. On the contrary, there were times when our Yankee brethren were decid- edly uncivil. Fact Is they were real mean to us at times, and didn't seem to care whether they killed us or scared us to death.
 But let that pass. The fighting s all over, except pneumatically, and we have forgiven most of them, especially the dead and crippled ones. The ques- ton now is one of academies. Was it in fact civil war? The dictionary informs us that civil war is war be- tween different sections of one coun- try, or between differing factions of one people" and we deny that the definition fits the circumstances. We deny that we were one government or one people. while the fight was on, no matter what view may he held and insisted on by those who deny that the Southern States did or could se- cede. With them it may seem that it was really a civil war.
 But what shall that war be called. It is proper that a name shall be de- cided on which will be satisfactory to both sections, and at the same time be short and appropriate. The war between the States, or the war be- tween the Federal and Confederate governments" would either of them he appropriate and satisfactory. but either is too long and cumbersome to suit this fast age. "The war of se- cession'' has been suggested, but that it not compact enough. The Chicago Tribune says of the discussion;
 As q matter of fact there Is room l for plenty of argument on the subject. In a strict sense the war was not a civil war, because 1t was case sf section against section rather than an internecine fight of citizens as a whole The point of view might make a wide difference of opinion about the strict meaning of the word "rebel'' anC it's applicability to those who took part in the Confederate States move ment In Ike meme manner tnJre bethsr ,s shabi tb States actually seeded or not. N' term. therefore, which has been useG is entirely free from objection by th'
 Practical considerations dictate tha some expression should be general! and sufficiently indicative in charactei to leave no doubt of its application The war of the four years following 1861 was one of the greatest struggle of world history. The politics, ant shaped by 1t. American hlstorica writings will be filled with reference to It. As the years go by the persona bitterness will bo forgotten and tn contest will be viewed in the large a. a powerful factor In national life For all these reasons the adoptiAn 0 simple phrase of reference is desir able
 The Tribune, however is disposed f. favor ''civl war" as the most simpl term that can be used. and as the on open to least objection, and we sup pose after the action of the Senatoria authorities that term will stick sc If the other side thinks the war wa civil one we'll try to be content.