Year: 1864

FELLOW CITIzr r4Ns The result of the
recent election e n the amendment to the
Consultation c.t the State, allowing sol
dlers |" the field to vote, is gratifying, in
'asmuh ) it shows that the great heart OF
the cor amonwealth is right, in the fearful
ana bloody struggle going on to preserve
Efh great republic, and that these brave
men are worthy to help govern the coun-
try for which they make 50 many sacrlh-
.ces and suffer so many privations.


The friends of the Union have brought
about this result, while the opposition
have used their powerful organization to
prevent it, with theevident object OF weak
enng the Union armies by DISTINGUISHING
the soldier, and thereby strengthening
themselves at the approaching Presiden-
tal election; and ia connection with this
election let us reason together.


The campaign of 1864 is now fairly
opened The issue upon which the cam
paign is to be made is clearly indicated.
The enemies of the government have
publicly and authoritatively declared their
purpose in the contest. That declaration
places the duty of patriots in light as
broad and clear as that OF noon. There
is no mistake either the spirit or the OBJ
.ject of our opponents; it is the same that
impelled the chiefs or armed treason to
attempt the overthrow of free government
on this continent in lS6O-Gl. Neither
time nor reflection, nor regard for the
peace of society in the loyal States, nor
the desolations which have dcvoured the
prosperity of the south in the grip Of
war, have wrought ANY modification of
their hatred for government founded up
on the opinions of the people expressed
through the ballot box.


1t is the part of wisdom to anticipate
evil, and to prepare to destroy it before it
grows too formidable to overthrow. The
attitude of the parties to the Presidential
contest gives rise to a serious question
the most serious of any which can en-
gage the attention of the true patriot and
good citizen. That question is briefly
stated Shall we have lasting peace,
through a vigorous prosecution Of this
war for national life, or interminable war,
through peace based upon disunion?


The issue is sharply defined. The ut
terances Of the Baltimore Convention de-
cisively declare for peace through elTec
tive war; the uttcranccs of the Chicago
Convention as decisiyely pronounce for
the alternative presented in the question
stated. They mean that, or they are
without meaning. The opposition to Mr..
Lincon contemplates disunion as cure
for the ills under which We lie. His de-
feat would divide the continent into fac
tious States. Nor is this mere assertion,
The political history of the country for
the last four years is a mass of oyerwhel-
ming evidence in support Of its entire,
its disgraceful truth.


And first in evidence of its truth, We
have the declaration, informal but not less
weighty, because reiterated and unvary-
ing.) of the rebel chiefs, that the South
will not treat for peace save upon the ba-
sis of recognition of its independence
The press of the South omits no opportu-
nifty to impress upon US and the world
that peace can on y come through recog
milton. Recognition is but another name
for separation. And finally. every Euro
pcan nation has come to re gard the result
of this war as certain to be one Of two
things-either subjugation or disunion
1t is the clear conviction which truth
brings to every rational, enlightened mind
1t is, therefore, entitled to great weight
second only to the resultant fact.


1t is due to the opponents of Mr.. Lin
coin to state that they pretend to belive in
the probability of peace and Union
through some compromise, the terms OF
which are not clearly stated.


1t will be easy to show the futility of
such hopes, if it has not already been
done. 1t will not be a difficult task to
show that such belief does not take root
in conviction. The leaders of the oppo-
sition are men of great ability and more
than ordinary sagacity. They cannot,
therefore, be ignorant of the facts which
are of public record. Those facts effectu-
ally preclude the possibility of peace and
Union through any compromise, unless
the terms involve recognition; and that
would be disunion.


But let us thorougly consider this ques-
tion of peace through compromise 1t is
reasonable to suppose that the chiefs of
the rebellion would have accepted terms
at the outset if at all 1t is alleged by
our opponents that Mr.. Lincoln hurried
the nation into war, not only without con