Year: 1863

/. ever, the extraordinary desire Of the NortheI
: people encompassed the people; but it is fol
0 TO go over tbe history of that body, so we
5 known to the people of the country. Suffice
to say, that no terms could be made-no prof.
: osition was entertained, that was not humilia
ting in its character, even 10 the border State
B. and destructive to the peace Of the free States
So we come down to the day when the frs
gun was fred upon Sumter, aud brought upo
; US civil war.


Now, whoever takes this matter and exam
ines into it carefully, care not to which part.


he belongs, can not doubt that the first duty Q
every man iD the North is to the GoverDmen


until this conflict shall be brought TO end


Why do we argue these points, and why dt


the Union people gather together in mas


meetings of this kind to strain their lungs anC


reason upon this question? One would think
the whole people would he of one mind OF


this subject, and that there could be no neces-


sity for any argument or appeal to the people
of the land. Why do we do it? Because the


sad and humiliating truth is, there is party


as there always has been, when our country


was engaged in a contest that takes the eide


of the enemy against the country. do not
! propose to denounce or abuse any man who
holds an opinion contrary to my own. But let


US reason together. Why are you, my Demo
cratic friends, opposing this contest? Y You say
1 it is carried on BY Whig Administration,


which you don't like. Is that a sufficient rea-
son? Suppose you had man in Jail convict
ed Of burglary, would you say This man shall
not go to the Penitentiary because a Whig
sheriff is going to take him there, or '' because
majority of the jurymen who convicted him
we're Whigs?" Upon this principle you would
not help enforce any of the laws of the State
because Of the Governor being Wing. The
spirit OF opposition is as unreasonable and IN
Just in one case as the other. You won't
support the Administration in this war, be-
cause it is a Whig Administration? Brother
Democrat that will not do. You complain
that we have been so slow and tardy, that the
rebellion should have been put down long ago,
and that if the Democrats had managed the
war, it would have been. You forget the DIFF
6culties the Administration had to encounter
at the commencement the struggle; and that
if we have not accomplished everything we
should have accomplished, there may be rea-
sons for it of which we are ignorant: But IS
it the duty of a prudent man to stop and ar
que this point? Now, brother Democrat,
will make bargain with you: Do you go
heart and hand into this effort of the Admins
iration and if at the end they shall not have
put Down the rebellion, and you will show me
a Democrat who will make a cleaner sweep,
we will ground arms, and I viii go upon the
stamp for bis election Great cheers 1t will
take time, but If the work is done, good pa
triot can afford to wait. It may be that some
small politicians may spoil before that time
but we had better sacrifice a few of them rath-
er than sacrifice The whole country.


But you don't like the A Aboitionists in this
war. Aha that's the corn on the toe. Now,
so far as the policy of the thing is concerned,
think myself that Mr.. Lincoln was not very
wise iu issuing his Emancipation Proclamation.
differed with him on that point; but l am not
sure but he is going to beat me yet. l said,
at the time it was issued that it would start
every political cavalier in the land, who would
create parties and dissensions and that if the
same thing could have been accomplished some
other way, ii would have been better. And
then l believed a good deal in the letter Of
General Butler from Annapolis, that proposed
to treat these blacks as conlrabands of war
7 Applause But we viii leave the policy a
lone for the present.


The question that comes up at this time is,
should the Government employ the slaves of
the South in putting down this rebellion? If
you call this policy aboltionizing the war, it
is species of Abolitionism which I have not
learned heretofore Does any man put himself
on the ground that it is unconstitutional 10
use every means, either in the hands Of the en-
emy or our own, to put down the rebellion?-'
IF the army, marching through The enemys
country, finds hundred horses or mules, and
needs them, it takes them and drives them a
way. That is all right; and the doctrine OF
slavery is that the slave man is but chattel, |
a mere animal. But l put it upon another
ground, that every slave working upon a
plantation of the enemy is equal to two men
in the rebel army engaged in shooting down
the men in the Union army Every negro is |
raising produce for the Southern army, and
yielding taxes to pay them. The negro Oh
the plantation, who hoes his corn, is Just as
effective a man as if he were in the army, and
more so, for although he fights well in our ar
my, doubt whether he would fight in theirs.
Do you say we shall not take him, and lead
him to fight his own master and oppressor?-
Do you want any more of our own race to be
slaughtered thar we can avoid? Do you want
them to cripple US ali the more by reason oil
their employment? Ifyou say so, you are op
posed to the progress of the war at all, and
there Is very little hope for your redemption
[Cheers This you call abolitioniziDg the war!
Your orators are talking about this a good
deal in varions sections of the country, and
claim that it is unconstitutional to interfere
with slavery in the Southern States. l should
Ike to know what these chaps down there
have had to do with the Constitution since
they fired on Sumter. Years ago, before
they had formed Constitution of their own.
if you had gone down there and said you were
there to protect them By the Constitution,
they would have said you were crazy, and put
YOU in the dungeon l would like to konw
what constitutional right they have? They
have the constitutional right to be whipped, il
we can do it, and think we can. voice:
that's fact But don't choose to go in


to a discussion of the question whether the
Constitution ever gave them any rights in re
gard to slavery. The word 'slave" is not in
the Constitution 1t is true that it saws some
thing about fugitives from labor, and that is
ali the right in regard to slavery they ever had
in the Constitution. All other rights Of slave


ry they obtained under their own State Con
stitutions.


But in regard to the whole question OF
slavery, in connection with the war, | say to
you, my friends, that you may set your minds
perfectly at rest on he subject. l make the
prediction here to day, and l am not the first
man who made it, for l bat repeat what others
have said, that IN as Jar as The political char