E458 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 DDDDb]i4D47b 
 

 
 \^^/1.*o «5^. .'<(, .*i 
 
 
 
 'k^ 
 
 -ft^ 
 
% '-©^ /\ ■°»^-' /% Iw-' /\ 'W 
 
 
 
 A" 
 
 
.;.3/ 
 
 S I* E E C EL O I^^ 
 
 HON. LEf IS B. GUSCKEL, 
 
 OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, 
 
 Delivered in the Senate of Ohio, March 2d, 1863, on the Resolutions of Mr. 
 -J Welch in favor of the Union : 
 
 ■ /' 
 Mr. President : — We have had two (was no longer to suppress the_ rebellion, 
 days of discussion costing the Stite hun- 1 but in violation of ihe Constitution, to 
 dreds of dollars. We have had hours of abolisih slavery. 
 
 learned constitutional argument, hours of 
 bitter j);irtisan controversy, hours devoted 
 
 '^ to angiy and violent denunciation of our 
 
 >4 National and Scate Administrations — and 
 
 vpuri ■what? Let us go back and see. — 
 
 Three siinp'e resolutions in favor of the 
 
 >^ Union: one "renewing our pledges, in 
 
 ^ the name of the people of Ohio, to the 
 
 General Government, to render it all the 
 
 aid within our power, in its laudable ef- 
 
 ^3 forts to put down the rebellion, preserve 
 
 ^' the Constitution and restore the Union," 
 and the other two, " solemnly protesting 
 against any division of the loyal States, 
 with the ultimate design of attaching any 
 portion of those States to the so-called 
 Southern CunfedeVacy." Is there any- 
 thing in the.-e Resolutions to which a loy- 
 al man could oljject ? Anything with 
 which a Democrat, who professes to be in 
 favor of the '' Constitution as it is and the 
 Un on as it was," can find fault? 
 
 Why then all this discu::sion, all this 
 
 I propose to examine these points : 
 
 WHO RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WAR. 
 
 First, Was it possible for the Adminis- 
 tration party to have pre^ entod this war? 
 Are Repubiicans to blame for its inaugu- 
 ration? Is it really a "Lincoln war," 
 "an Abolition war," as charged by the 
 Democratic orators and editors? I find 
 an answer in the Crittenden Resolutions, 
 about which Senators have spoken so much 
 and so eloquently. The Senator from 
 Perry embodied it in resolutions he offer- 
 ed last winter, and we are told that it ex- 
 presses the doctrines of the Democratic 
 party on the subject of the war. The 
 Crittenden Resolution says (and I quote 
 the exact language :) 
 
 " That the present deplorable civil warhas been 
 forced upon the countrj by the di.^unionisl.s of the 
 Southern Stati'S. now in revolt asainst the Con- 
 stitutional (iovernmeut, and in arms around the 
 Capitol." 
 
 jMark the language, " that the present 
 
 bitter inveclive ? I have listened for two : deplorable civil war has been forced upon 
 days, with the most careful attention, to | the country " — not by the Republican 
 the speeches of the* learned Senators on party, not by Lincoln or his administra- 
 the opposition, with a view of ascertain-! tion, not even by the Abolitionists of the 
 iiig, and I have been able to gather but North,but "by the disunionists OF the 
 
 two points : 
 
 First, That the war with all its terri- 
 ble evils, might have been prevented, if 
 
 Southern States." Could proof be 
 stronger or more conclusive? 
 
 But it is alleged that this might have 
 
 at the proper time, certain concessions had been avoided, if at an earlier day, the 
 been made and certain compromises per- j Republicans had favored the Crittenden 
 mitted by the Republican or Union amendment. AVould its adoption have 
 party. I appeased the South — prevented seces- 
 
 Second, That after the war was com-'siou? If so, why did Southern Senators 
 menced, the Democratic party would have refuse to vote for it y Why did Keitt of 
 continued to support the Administration, South Carolina, telegraph to his own 
 had it not demonstrated that its purpose State, "We can get the Crittenden Com- 
 
promise, but wewill have no compromise?" 
 Why did Yancey, in December, 1861, use 
 the following' language: '"No profiered 
 compromise, no amendments to the Con- 
 Btitution, no additional guarantees, can 
 delay her (the South's) action for inde- 
 pendence one moment. There is no de- 
 fect in the fundamental law — therefore, it 
 needs no alteration ?" Afterward, Yan- 
 cey, in connection with Rust and Mann, 
 as commissioners from the Confederate 
 States, to Grreat Britain, in a formal com- 
 munication made by them to Lord Rus- 
 sel, used this language : " It was from no 
 fear that the slaves would be liberated, 
 that secession took place. The very par- 
 ty in power had proposed to guarantee 
 slavery forever in the States, if the South 
 would but remain in the Union." 
 
 Do you want further proof? I will 
 give it to you, and from authority you 
 dare not dispute. I read from Stephen 
 A. Douglas, and it is one of the last of 
 his public utterances : 
 
 "There never has been a time, from the day 
 that Washington was inauguraled first Prosiiient 
 of these Uni ed States when the rights of the 
 Southern States stood firmer under the laws 
 of the land than they do now ; there never 
 was a time when they had not as good cause fo 
 disunion as they have to-day. "^^ * •■= '■' The 
 slavery question is a mere pretext. The election 
 of Lincoln a mere excuse. The present secession 
 movement is the result of an enormous conspira- 
 cy, formed by leaders in the Southern Confedera- 
 cy, more than twelve months ago-" 
 
 Douglas ought to be good authority to 
 Democrats — ho used to be, I am sure. 
 If good authority, then have I clearly 
 proven that slavery was a mere pretext, 
 that no concession, no compromise on the 
 part of the North could have prevented 
 secession, and as a consequence, war, with 
 all its terrible incidents. 
 
 Mr. FiNCK — Will the Senator allow me 
 just here to read from Mr. Douglas on 
 this point: 
 
 " If you of the Republican side are not willing 
 to accept this, nor the proposition of the Senator 
 from Kentucky. (Mr Crittenden) pray tell mo 
 what you are willini; to do? 1 address the inqui- 
 ry to the llepublicans alone, for the reason that 
 in the committee of thirteen, a few days ago 
 every member frOm the South, including those' 
 from the Cotton States, (Messrs. Toombs and Da- 
 vis) expressed their readiness to accept the prop- 
 osition of my venerable friend from Kentucky 
 (Mr, Crittenden) as a final settlement of the con- 
 troversy, if tendered and sustained bv the Repub- 
 lican members. Hence the sole responsibility of 
 our disagreement, and the only diffi>"ulty iu the 
 way of an amicable adjustment, is with the Ee- ' 
 publican party." 
 
 Mr. GuNCKEL — Those words were 
 
 ^ -3 
 
 used in the excitement of a heated debate 
 in the Senate, and at a time, when he may 
 have considered Davis and Toombs worthy 
 of belief — he found out his mistake, but 
 too soon afterward. Besides Davis did 
 not seem anxious, at that time, for a sep- 
 aration; but wV.-a 5 .J own views were, 
 he did not speak, iox Wiglall, Benjamin, 
 Slidell and other Senators, who, although 
 in their seats at the time, refused to vote 
 for the Crittenden Compromise, and so 
 helped to del'eat it. Douglas afterward 
 said, what I know to be true, for I was in 
 Washington at the time and heard similar 
 language, that Southern members declar- 
 ed, if they were furnished with a blank 
 sheet of paper and pern)itted to write 
 their own terras thereon, they would not 
 consent to remain in the Union. 
 
 No, the South wanted no compromise, 
 she had long before determined on sepa- 
 ration and the establishment of a new 
 Confederacy with slavery for its corner 
 stone. General Jackson, in a letter to a 
 friend on nullification, written twenty 
 years ago, said, " Tke tariff via& only tloi 
 pret'Xf, and disunion and a Soiifheru Cmi- 
 fedcraci/ the real ohject. The next pretext 
 iciTI he the neriro or the slavery question.^' 
 
 The old Hero was right ; the South 
 never abandoned that purpose and the 
 present wicked rebellion is the consum-. 
 mation of what Calhoun's followers have 
 labored for ever since, that time. Said 
 Mr. Ehett, in the South Carolina Con- 
 vention, " The secession of South Caro- 
 lina is not an event of a day. It /.-• tiof 
 anything jn'oduced hy Mr. Linroln'f. < la-- 
 tion, or the non-execution of the fn git ice 
 slave law. It has beex a matter 
 
 WHICH HAS BEEN (iATHERIXCi HEAD FOK 
 
 THIRTY YEARS. ' 3ir. Keitt, in the same 
 Convention, said, '■'■ IJiave been engaged 
 in this movement (secession) ever since I 
 entered political life." 
 
 And yet learned Senators on this floor, 
 knowing, as they must, all these facts, tell 
 us they cannot support the war, because 
 the North did not compromise and ,so 
 prevent secession ! Do they not, like 
 their Democratic brethren in the South, 
 also make this a "mere pretext?" You 
 shall see, before I am through. 
 
 FOR WHAT THE WAR IS PROSECUTED. 
 
 I now come to the second point, urged 
 
at p:reat lenjrth and with much learning 
 and eloquence by the opposition, to wit: 
 Tiiat thti Domocratio party would have 
 cjntiaued to support the Administration 
 juid the war, had not the President aban- 
 doned his original policy of prosecuting 
 the war, by eoHw'' -:-,. t:i;ij means, for the 
 sole purpose of sup[*\te*i'iig the rebellion. 
 Now, Mr. President, I claim," that the 
 President has not abandoned his original 
 policy, but that he still prosecutes the 
 war, under the Constitution and for the 
 f<9le purpose of suppressing the rebellion. 
 And on this point I call as my witness 
 one whose honesty will not be question- 
 ed, the President himself. I read from 
 the reply of the President to the address 
 of the working men of Manchester : 
 
 When I came, on the 4th of March. 1861, through 
 a tree and ooustituttonal ulection, to preside in 
 the Government of the United States, the I'oiin- 
 try w;is found at the vevj^ti of a civil war. What- 
 ever raiijht have b 'en the cau«e, or whose soever 
 tiie fault, one duty paramount to all others, 
 was before me, namely to maintain and preserve 
 at ouee the Coasticution and the intesrity of the 
 Federal Republic. A conscientious purpose to 
 psrforra this duty is the key to all the measures! 
 of administration which have been, and to alii 
 whicu will hereafter be, pursued. 
 
 Here, if ever, the President would I 
 have averred the fact, if he hid prose- 1 
 cuted the war in any other way or for any| 
 other purpose than avowed : for the Eng-| 
 lish people have from the beginning re. I 
 fused us sympathy because we prosecated 
 the war for the restoration of the Union 
 and not for the abolition of slavery. | 
 
 HABEAS CORPUS AND ARBITRAllV AR-; 
 RESTS. 
 
 But it is charged by Senators that the I 
 President has been guilty of a palpable | 
 find gross violation of the Constitution iuj 
 this, that he has assumed to suspend thei 
 writ of habeas corpus, when that great i 
 privilege was peculiarly w^ithin the power j 
 of Congress. These gentlemen admit j 
 that the Constitution says that this writ: 
 may be suspended in times of great dan- 
 ger, in case of invasion or rebellion— by 
 whom? This is just the question. 
 Learned lawyers and writers have said that 
 the privilege belongs to Congress ; while 
 others, equally learned, have said it be- 
 longs to the President. Who is to deter- 
 mine the question '/ Who but the Presi- 
 dent, who has taken a solemn oath to 
 " preserve, protect and defend " this same 
 
 Constitution ? This ought not to be dis- 
 puted by Democrats, for it has always 
 been a part of their party creed. Bat to 
 remove all doubt, 1 read from an author!- 
 they, they will hardly question, it is from 
 the celebrated Bank Veto Message of 
 Andrew Jackson : 
 
 " The Congress, the E.\ecutive. and the Supreme 
 Court, must each for itseli be guided by its own 
 opiuiou of the Constitution- pjaf.h public officer 
 who takes an oath to support the Constitution, 
 means that he will support it as he understands 
 it, and not as it is understood by others It is as 
 much the duty of the House of Representatives, 
 of the 8enatj, and of the President, to decide up- 
 on tlie constitutionality of any bill or resolutiun 
 which may be presented to them for passage or 
 approval, as it is f(jr the Supreme Judges, when 
 it may be brought belore thein Kor judicial deoi 
 siou. The opinion of the .1 uuges has no more au- 
 thority over Congress than tne opinion of Con- 
 gress lias over the .Fudges, and on that point the 
 President is independent of both " 
 
 The President is to determine these 
 questions ibr himself — is he? Well that's 
 just what Abraham Lincoln did. If right 
 for President Jackson to interpret the 
 Constitution for himself, it ought to be 
 equally so for President Lincoln. But if 
 not the President, who is to determine 
 the constitutionality of any measure ? 
 The Supreme Couit? Why even the 
 Democratic party refused to abide by its 
 decisions. I find by reference to Hal- 
 stead's History of the National Demo- 
 cratic Convention,' held at Charleston, 
 that 3Ir. Ewing, of Tennessee, oflered the 
 following resolution : 
 
 *' Inasmuch as differences of opinion exist in the 
 Democratic party as to the nature and extent of 
 powers of a territorial legislature, and as to the 
 powers and duties of Congress, under the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, over the institution 
 of slavery in the territories ; 
 
 " Resolved, That the Democratic party will 
 abide by the decisions of the Suprme Court of the 
 United States on the questions of constitutional 
 law," 
 
 Here was a proposition that the Dem- 
 ocratic party should simply abide by the 
 decision of the Supreme Court, and it 
 was voted down by a vote of 21 for and 
 238 against — the ivhole Ohio delegation 
 voting against the resolution. 
 
 But how came the President to suspend 
 the writ of habeas corpus. It must be 
 remembered that when on the 4th of 
 March, ISlil, he came into power, seven 
 State.s, being South Carolina, Mississippi, 
 Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and 
 Texas had seceded, the rebel Congress 
 had met at Montgomery, adopted a con- 
 stitution, elected and inaugurated a Pre*- 
 
4 
 
 ident and Vice President, and matured a 
 
 bill for raising 100,000 soldiers. P'or 
 weeks tliere.if'ier, the President's course 
 was every way pacific. But 1 need not 
 teil you how the rebels fired on the Star 
 of the West, when he attempted to send 
 provisions to Fort Sumter ; how cowardly 
 they attacked the little garrison of one 
 hundred starving men under JLijor An- 
 derson with eleven batteries and 8,0o0 
 men ; how alter they compelled its sur- 
 render, Mr. Walker, the Kebel Secrelary 
 of War, boasted they would immediately 
 march on and take Washington. You 
 know all this, and what iollowed, only 
 too Vi'ell. Suffice it to say, that after iour 
 more States had seceded, an attempt was 
 uiade to take Maryland out. There seem- 
 ed but one way to save her to the Union 
 and that was to crush the movement by 
 an arrest of the leading traitors. Then 
 was forced upon the President the ques- 
 tion whether he was auihurizcd under the 
 Constitution to susftend the writ and order 
 the arrests. He examined that sacred in- 
 strument — it clearly gave the power — 
 b it to whom? He consulted his law ad- 
 viser and his Cabinet — they agreed the 
 power was his and that the absolute neces- 
 sity of the case required its immediate ex- 
 ercise. They urged upon him, that such 
 arrests had been made under Washington 
 in the Revolution and by Jackson in the 
 war of 1812. Satisfied that it was his 
 duty, he did it, and loyal men everywhere 
 applauded the act, for by it Maryland was 
 saved to the Union. 
 
 Are Democrats, because they happen 
 to take a different view of this constitu- 
 tional question, or because they happen to 
 doubt the propriety of these arrests, ab- 
 solved from the allegiance they owe their 
 Government in a time of war ? Will loyal 
 men refuse to support their Grovernment, 
 in a time of great public danger, on any 
 such pretext? 
 
 THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 
 
 And now as to the Emancipation Proc- 
 lamation. It is charged that it too is a 
 flagrant violation, not only of the Consti- 
 tution, but of the Law of Natiuns. The 
 Senator fr)m Perry argues, and with 
 much ingenuity and ability, that this is 
 not a rebellion but a civil war, and that 
 beiug a civil war, the Confederatee are 
 
 guaranteed under the law of nations, all 
 the rights of belligerents, and that among 
 these, is the right of alsidute security to 
 the private property of individuals, that 
 slaves are such property, and hence can 
 not legally be confi.~cated or emancipated 
 by the President as Commander-in-Chief 
 of our armies. 
 
 Now, in the first place, I do not con- 
 cede that this is technically a civil war. 
 Halleck, in his work on International 
 Law, page 333, says : 
 
 " Wnrs of insurrectii>n and revolutinn are. in 
 one sense, civil vrars, but, thi:* term is mure usu- 
 ally applicil to those conttjsts which are waged be- 
 tween rival families or fa(aions tor party ascend- 
 ancy in a Slate, rather than for its dismember- 
 ment, or for a radic:il change in its government. 
 Each party in .such cases is usually entitled to the 
 rights of war as against the other and also with 
 respect to neutrals. Mk.rk rebei,i,ions, however. 
 
 AllE CONSIDEUED AS EXCEPTIONS TO THIS KTLE. as 
 every government treats those who rebel against 
 its authority, aceordiig to its own municipal laws 
 and without reaard to the general rules which 
 internatinnal jui isprudence establishes between 
 sovereign Stales " 
 
 But again, I do not concede, that by 
 the law of nations, as between beliger- 
 ents, the President would be prevented 
 from using such means as would be ne- 
 cessary to weaken the enemy and force 
 an early and honorable peace. And on 
 this point I quote first the opinion of 
 Judge Story, in Cranch's Reports, vol. 8, 
 page 167 : 
 
 " All that I contend for is that a declaration of 
 wargives a right to confiscate enemy's propi'rty 
 and enables tlie power to whom the (•.■secutioii of 
 the laws and the prosecution of the war are con- 
 tided to entbrce that right. If, indeed, there be a 
 limit imposed as lo the extent t<j which hostilities 
 may be carried by the ^ xecutivc, I admit that the 
 Executive can not lawfully transcend that limit : 
 but if no such limit exists, the war ma> be carried 
 (in according to the principles of the modern law 
 of nations, and enforced when, and where, and ou 
 what property, the Executive chooses," 
 
 And again, I quote Vatel, p. 347 : 
 
 " Since the object of a just war is to repress in- 
 justice and violence, and forcibly to compel him 
 who is deaf to the voice of justice, we have a 
 right to put in practice, against ihe enemy every 
 measure that is necessary in orJer to weaken him 
 and disable him from resist ni; us and supporting 
 his injustice ; and we may choose such methods as 
 are the most efficacious and best calculated to at- 
 tain the end in view, provided they be not of an 
 odious kind, nor uujusiitiable in themselves, and 
 prohibited by the law of nations,' 
 
 I have other authorities, even stronger 
 than these, but I will not deta'n the Sen- 
 ate by reading them at this time. I am 
 quite free to admit, that these same books 
 lay it down that " private property on 
 1 ind, is now, as a general rule ot war, ex- 
 empt from seizure or confiscation," but 
 
5 
 
 they also state that •■ thi:< rule is not by 
 any means absolute or universal '" — and 
 the exceptions given. such as confiscations 
 or seizures by ■way of penalty fur military 
 ofreiises, contributions for the support of 
 the invading- armies, property taken in 
 storming a fortress or town, etc.. show that 
 the exceptions are about as general as the 
 rule itself. 
 
 But it has been no part of my purpose 
 to argue this que.-tion — that has heen so 
 ably and well done by others, that I am 
 spared the effort. All I have cared to 
 show is that in this ca^e, as in that of the 
 suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, 
 there were grave legal questions which 
 somebody had to determine, that that 
 somebody Avas of necessity the President 
 himself, that if he hone-tly determined 
 them, and for justifiable purposes, wheth- 
 er right or wrong, it is the bounden duty 
 of all loyal men to support and sustain 
 him therein. And how came he to issue 
 the proclamation? It was represented to 
 the President, by his Cabinet and his 
 Generals, that notwithstanding all the ex- 
 penditure of money and sacrifice of Hfe. 
 the rebellion, instead of being suppressed, 
 was gaining strength and becoming more 
 formidable ; and they declared that the 
 strong arm of the enemy was their slaves ; 
 that they not only aided the rebellion 
 by digging their trenches, building their 
 forts, but gave them support and succor 
 by cultivating their fields and supplying 
 them with bread and clothing. Strike 
 down this power, said they, and we can 
 overcome this rebellion. What was the 
 President's duty ? Who was to deter- 
 mine? Who but himself? lie did de- 
 termine and act — and whether wisely or 
 not — I shall not now inquire. But one 
 thing is certain, that whatever its results 
 at home it has had a most happy efiiect 
 abroad. The people of England, France, 
 and indeed of Europe, could not under- 
 stand our contest. Our struggle for the 
 Union seemed to them a struggle for a 
 mere abstraction. The President's proc- 
 lamation has opened their eyes ; they 
 now see the true nature of the contest, 
 theirsympathies are with u^, and so strong 
 has this feeling grown, that late advices 
 assure us, that neither England or France 
 would now dare to disregard their opin- 
 ions and intervene in our affairs. 
 
 DUTY OF LOYAL MEN. 
 
 But. Mr. President, whether the Pres- 
 ident acted wisely or not, whether good or 
 bad results have followed, it is the duty 
 of all loyal men to siipport the Crovern- 
 ment, in time of war as again>t a coyi- 
 mon enemy. All the books figrec that 
 " when a State has declared war, every 
 citizen is bound to assist in carrying it fo 
 a successful conclusion, whatever may be 
 his individual opinion of the necessity or 
 propriety of the resort to arms by his own 
 gnvernment. Even though he may not 
 deem the objects of the war justifiable, 
 or its motive commendable, he is, never- 
 theless, bound to stand by the State in 
 the prosecution of that war.'' It is the 
 same principle aptly expiessed in what 
 u^ed to be Democratic doctrine, " inY 
 COUNTRY BIGHT OR WRONG." And yet 
 Senators, claiming to be Democrats and 
 loyal men, declare that because they do 
 not happen to agree w-ith the Presiuent 
 as to the legality or propriety of some of 
 his measures, they will render no aid, no 
 assistance whatever to the Government in 
 this her struggle for national resistance. 
 
 Test this course of conduct by a fami- 
 liar illustration. The Senator from Per- 
 ry, on stepping into the street sees his 
 neighbor's house on fire ; he sees that un- 
 less the fire be checked, and that speedi- 
 ly, it will destroy not only that house, but 
 the houses of other neighbors. He starts 
 to help — but stops, looks on and coolly 
 says, " That's a bad fire, a very bad fire ; 
 it was vei'y wicked to set fire to that poor 
 man's liouse, it ought to be put out ; yes 
 it ought, by all means to be put out, it 
 seems to need every body s help, but / 
 don't like ihe ivay those firemen are doing 
 it ; I don't think that's the best way^ and 
 Im afraid they are violating some ordi- 
 7iance of the town or some jjrinciple of the 
 common law ; I tcill have nothing to do 
 with it; I tcill neither hel^J myse/f 7ior 
 encourage others to help. 
 
 What would his neighbors conclude, 
 what say of him';* Why, that he didn't 
 leant the fire jnd out ; that he nanted the 
 hmise to hum down, and that his sympa- 
 thies were with the incendiary and not 
 with the owner of the house. Just so 
 with our country. The Senator from 
 Perry sees her in danger — about to bo 
 
destroyed by wicked men. lie lieiu'.s the 
 call for help, reto^^-iiizes its necessity, but 
 refuses aid. becau.-e he docsiit like the icay 
 in which the Pn-sident and the ioyal iico- 
 ■ple are trying to save, the country! Are 
 we to canelude that he makes this a mere 
 pretext and that his s-yr.ipathies are with 
 the rebels, and not with the brave and 
 gallant men who light under the " Stars 
 and Stripes ? " 
 
 "SVENDELL PHILLIPS, GARRISON & CO. 
 
 But Senators have, durinir this whole 
 discussion, made persistent effo:ts to hold 
 the Administr.ition re-pousible for the 
 extreme views of Wendell Phillips, Cxar- 
 rison, Pillsbury and others, of that school. 
 In the name oi' the I'^nion party, I utter- 
 ly repudiate them. They never belonged 
 to the Whig, Republican, or Union par- 
 ties, and we are not responsible for their 
 views. But there is a striking similarity 
 between their positions and that of this 
 patent, modern Di^mocracy. What dues 
 Phillips say ? What has he said all 
 through the war ? 
 
 "If the President wages this war for the sole 
 purpose of thu abolition of slavery I will sup- 
 port him : but if he does it to preserve the Union, 
 I will have nothing to do with it." 
 
 Mr. Kexney — Does not Cassius M. 
 Clay, who is one of the Administration 
 Generals, say the same thing. 
 
 Mr. (tUNCKEL — I don't know what 
 Mr. Clay's views are on this point, but if 
 his support of the Grovernment is condi- 
 tioned, upon its adoption of this or that 
 policy, like Phillips and the Senator from 
 Ashland, then I repudiate his doctrines 
 also. 
 
 Mr. Kenney — The Administration 
 honors him by appointment to office. 
 
 Mr. Gunckel — No doubt the Admin- 
 istration has been deceived by some un- 
 worthy men from the Republican party, 
 as I know it has been by some from the 
 Democratic party. Such mishaps are 
 unavoidable. 
 
 Similar attempts are niJide to hold the 
 Union party responsible for certain ex- 
 treme views of Mr. Conway, of Kansas. 
 I believe he was a Republican, but his 
 recent speeches and votes have not been 
 sanctioned by even his old party friends, 
 but on the other hand, his own Legisla- 
 ture and the Union press oil over the 
 
 North have repudiated him and his doc- 
 trines. But what is the matter with Con- 
 way. The war is not conducted in the 
 particular way that he thinks it should 
 be, and therefore will have no more to do 
 with it. Preciselj'' the position taken by 
 all the Democratic Senators on this floor. 
 They alike denounce the Administration 
 — alike refuse their country help in this 
 its hour of sorest need, and whether they 
 mean it or not, alike give " aid and com- 
 furt to the enemy." 
 
 the yallandigham democracy. 
 
 But, Mr. President. I very much I'ear, 
 that if the Administration were to go 
 back to its original policy, as these Sen- 
 ators want it to do, it would not bring 
 the Democratic party to an honest, hearty 
 support of the war; I fear this is only 
 another "pretext." Vallaudigham, in 
 his late New Jersey speech, as I find it 
 in the " Crisis," edited by that " blessed 
 martyr," Samuel Medary, says : 
 
 " There never was a time when, in the hearts of 
 the people, there was not an undjing opposition 
 to the war." And again: ' Seventy-five out of 
 every hundred of the men of the Noi th-west are 
 in favor of a cessation of hostilities." 
 
 He speaks of course for the Democratic 
 irdYty ; he could speak for no other. 
 
 '' But," says the Senator from Cler- 
 mont, " I don't approve of all Vallandig- 
 htim's sentiments; he does not represent 
 the Democratic party of Ohio." I take 
 issue with him there. 
 
 He does represent the Democratic par- 
 ty of Ohio, if we are to judge the party 
 by its leaders. I assert, and in so doing- 
 challenge contradiction, that every Dem- 
 ocratic paper in Ohio has, in whole or in 
 part, published his late speech in the 
 House of Representatives ; that not one of 
 these papers has dissented from his views, 
 or condemned the doctrines of his speech, 
 but that FORTY- NINE OUT OP EVERY FIF- 
 TY OP THEM HAVE FULLY ENDORSED 
 HIM AND SANCTIONED AND APPROVED 
 THE DOCTRINES OF HIS SPEECH ! 
 
 Mr. FiNCK questioned the truth of the 
 statement as to his district. 
 
 Mr. Gunckel — You shall see. The 
 Senator's organ is the Perry County Dem- 
 ocrat. I read from it the following ar- 
 ticle : 
 
 " VALLANDTGHAM FOR GOVEKNOR. 
 
 " We to-day raise to our mast head the honored. 
 
respected and much beloved name of C Ij. ^ al- 
 landisham as the clioicu of the Democracy of Per- 
 ry for the next fiovernor o;' the State ot Ohio 
 Had we known weeks ago what wo do now, this 
 would have been dune ttien. But there wa.s a del- 
 ioacy existing on our part and that of the Deitloc- 
 racy of the ci.;unty on the subject. All of us felt 
 tliateitlier this Kentleman or Ur. Olds should bo 
 the next Governor, but we did nut know iiow to 
 choose; and, in fact, did not know to a certainty 
 that V 111. would consent to run. But now the af- 
 fair is arranKi;d— the latter has. by letter-whieh 
 will be seen on the first p:iKe of to-day's pupur— 
 consented to be a candidate, and the Doctor has 
 coueluded to remain a private PUULIC stumper for 
 the present— that is, after his present honored 
 term expires 
 
 "aII hail. then, to the honored name of Vallan- 
 diffham! The conservative people of the State 
 of Ohio will place him in a position that he ' may 
 iae,' as ho says, 'able to hasten a re-uuiou of these 
 States.' " 
 
 I think tins settles tlie question so far 
 as Perry county is concerned. 
 
 The Senator from Clermont does nnt 
 approve of Vallandigham. Let us see 
 what his organ, the Clermont Sun, has to 
 say : 
 
 " The Clarke County Democrat is out for H .T 
 Jewett for tioveraor. As we are an original Val- 
 landighamer. of course we prefer him. since (Jov- 
 eruor Medary has declined. We think Jewett hijs 
 dirtied his hands too much with this war. ^Ye 
 want men for office with clean records." 
 
 Mr. Johnston admitted that the Cler- 
 mont Sun had indori^ed Vallandighani. 
 but he could show a subsequent article 
 from that paper very much qualifying its 
 first utterances on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Gunckel — Quite possible. A 
 very great reaction has been going on in 
 your party within the past few weeks. 
 
 And now I will read from the Ohio 
 Eagle : 
 
 " And we are happy in the belief — might say 
 positive knowledge — that the Deiuocrn.iry jire unit- 
 edly for him, (Vallandighani). There may ykt be 
 a few weak-kneed " Usios ' things clinging to the 
 skirts of the Democratic prrty in this community, 
 who will object to Vallandigham. For these we 
 do not speak We turn all such over to the famous 
 
 LETTER WRITKR, JeWett." 
 
 Mr. FiNCK stated that in his Congres- 
 sional disti-ict three of the Democratic 
 papers were for Vallandigham and three 
 for flewett. 
 
 Mil. Gunckel — That may be, but they 
 all indorse Vallandigham as a patriot 
 and sound to the core as a Democrat, al- 
 though as a matter of policy they may 
 prefer some one else as a candidate for 
 Governor. 
 
 Does any other Senntpr on the opposi- 
 tion deny my statement, if so, I will read 
 from his own organ similar extracts, for 
 I am prepared to make good my state- 
 
 ment. But unless the proof be called 
 for, I shall not detain the Senate longer 
 than to read one more extracts. I read 
 irom the Ohio Statesman an article copied 
 from the Cincinnati Enquirer : 
 
 " As IT Should Be— We understand that a very 
 friendly correspondence has passed between Hun. 
 Hugh .r. Jewett and Hon. C I. Vallandigham. in 
 which both express a strong desire that the ut- 
 most harmony and good feeling shall prevail be- 
 tween themselves and their I riends. hat is as 
 it should be. When consti tntioniil hoerty and 
 individual freedom and Slate rights are in peril. 
 Democrats should not allow any personal consut- 
 erationsorby gones to stiui'l in the wui ol a cor- 
 dial union of action, to preserve what Hlone dig- 
 nities, preserves and perpetuates the indcpi-nd- 
 enee and manhood of the Americau citiaen-— Ciu. 
 tnquiref. Fob. iicth." 
 
 So it seems, it has merely been a '-per- 
 sonal (lifficiiitij " between Jewett and Va!- 
 landigliam, and even that has now bei^n 
 "amicably adjasied," and hereafter we 
 are to have the "utmost harmony and 
 good feeling " between them and their 
 friends. Loyal Democrats all over the 
 State, who iiave been favoring Jewett, 
 have in their innocence supposed thee 
 were radical political differences of opin- 
 ion between him and Vallandigham, but 
 it turns out to have been merely a '■ per- 
 sonal difficulty." We are to presume 
 that they agree politically, and that Mr. 
 Jewett, like Senators here, will cheeriul 
 ly support Vallandigham, when nouiin: - 
 ted (as I believe he will be) by their 
 State Convention for Governor. 
 
 THE A'ALLANDIGHAM PT-ATFORM. 
 
 I have thus shown, beyond all contro- 
 versy, that the leaders of the straight 
 Deoiocratic party of Ohio endorse Val- 
 landigham and his doctrines. They stand 
 unmistakably on the Vallandigham 
 platform. And now, what is that plat- 
 form ? What are the doctrines of this 
 man, whom the leaders wish the honest, 
 loyal Democrats of Ohio to endorse ? 
 Let bis speeches and votes answer. On 
 the 2d N.^veudier, 1800, (before any State 
 had seceded) in a speech in Cooper Insti- 
 tute, he said : 
 
 " If any one or more of the States of this Union 
 should, at any time, secede— for reasons, of the 
 sulheiency and iustice of which, before God and 
 the groat tribun'il of history, they alone may judge 
 —much as I should deplore it, I nevf.k wori.D. as 
 .\ Rki'he.'^entativr in the Conokess of THE Lm- 
 TED States vote one poli.ar of money wherk- 
 
 BV ONE DBOP OF AMERICAN BLOOD SHOULD BE 
 SUED IN CIVIL WAR." 
 
 He was true to his word — he never did 
 
8 
 
 vo'e n man or a doUir! In liis late 
 spee-jh in the House of Keprerientatives, 
 he says : 
 
 " I did not support tlie w.ir ; and today I bless 
 GuJ. that not the sinell of so iniicli as one drop of 
 its blood is upon my garinenta." 
 
 And yet it has been cUiimed here thnt 
 the Democratic part}^ would support the 
 war^ if it were ttill conducted m a con- 
 stitutional way. Vallaudij-ham declared 
 against tlie war, not only beibre the su^- 
 pen.sion of the writ of habeas corpus and 
 tlie is.iu ng of the Emancipation Procla- 
 uvati tn.'but before the tear had i/<'t begun ! 
 But to remove all doubt on this point, I 
 le.er Senators to the following resolution 
 oifered by Mr. Adrian on the 7th of Jan- 
 uary, ISiJl : 
 
 '■ Kesolved, That we fully approve nf the bold 
 and pilriotic act of Major Audursoo.in withdraw- 
 iiis; troiu furt Aiouitne to fort riuiuter, and of the 
 il'jtermiaatioa of the Prusideiit t,o sustain that 
 f'.rarless officer in his present position- and that 
 we will support the President m all Ooastitutiou- 
 al m.jasures to enforce the laws and preserve the 
 Union." 
 
 Mark the language, '' that loe will sup- 
 port the President in all constitutional 
 measures to enforce the laws and preserve 
 the Vnion." Just what our friends say 
 the Democrats have been and still are 
 wdiing to do. Yet on the question of 
 adopting that resolution, Vailandigham 
 voted NO. 
 
 Mr. Kenney — How did the Republicans 
 vote on that resolution '( 
 
 Mr. GuNCKEL — They voted for it — 
 unanimously. Indeed Vailandigham was 
 the on y man on the Ohio delegation who 
 voted against it, and one of only four 
 members from the entire North who were 
 mean enough to voie the same way. And 
 yet Senators who so loudly assert their 
 ■willingness to prosecute the war, in a con 
 sdtutional way, are willing to endorse 
 Yallan Jighani by voting for him for Gov- 
 ernor ! 
 
 Dut let us look a little further into his 
 record. In his 14th January speech, he 
 says, '■ and now sir, I will not ask whether 
 the North-west can consent to i-eparation 
 from the South. Never. Nature forbids." 
 Jriovv do you reconcile that with his letter 
 to Rev. Sabin Hough, in which he Says, 
 " But all is over nuAV. It is loo late for 
 anything but peaceable S' para tion." And 
 how that with this further extract from 
 his l-4th January speech'/ 
 
 " Sir, we otin not, ou?ht not, will not, separnte 
 from the South. And if you of the East, who 
 have found this war against the South, and for 
 the negro, sratifyius to your hate or profitable to 
 your pursf. will continue it till a separation be 
 forced between the slavehoMins; and your non- 
 •slaveh./ldins States, then, believe me, and accept 
 it, as yiiu di<l not tlie other solemn warnings of 
 years past, the day which divides thk .Nohtu 
 FuoM TUK South, TH \T selfsame mav ueckeks 
 
 ETE14NAL UlVUKUE BETWEKN THE WeST AND THE 
 
 Kast." 
 
 How, I ask, do you reconcile these 
 with each , other ? And how all these 
 with his celebrated '' Quarter Section " 
 proposition, by which he proposed to cut 
 the Union into four p'eces. How, exce'pt 
 on the supposition that he contemjjlates, 
 nay more, desires, a separation of the 
 West from New England and a Union of 
 the North-west with the South? And 
 are the Democratic misses of Ohio pre- 
 pared to endorse such doctrines. I do 
 not believe it, for I have too much faith 
 in their honest}'-, their loyalty, their de- 
 voted love to the Union. But that the 
 leaders, notwithstanding their clamor for 
 the "Constitutiim as it is and the Union 
 as it was,'' do endorse, fully and entirely, 
 these doctrines, I think, I have clearly 
 shown. 
 
 And right here, let me commend to the 
 Senators from Perry and Seneca, who pro- 
 fess to be in favor, not only of the prose- 
 cution of the war, but a vigorous prosecu- 
 tion, "provided it be in const:tutional . 
 way " to a remark from that most blssed 
 .'f all the -'blessed martyrs," Mahoney of 
 the Dubuque (lowa) Herald : 
 
 " When we bear Democrats declare that they 
 will support the war, provided it be restored to a 
 war for the Union, we pity or despise thetn" 
 
 It shows the high consideration in 
 which war Democrats are held by the 
 leaders of the new Democracy, who like 
 Vailandigham, pride themselves on being 
 called '' butternu s.' 
 
 PEACE AND COMPROMISE. 
 
 But, sir, we have heard much of the 
 horrors of war and the liveliness of peace. 
 God knows, I too, deprecate war 1 I too 
 long for peace. But how is it possible ? 
 By compromise about wdiich Senatois 
 tajk so much? Can we do it by pass- 
 ing peace le-olutions as did the Leg- 
 islatures of New Jersey and Illinois? 
 Will the rebels listen to compromise? 
 Let us see. I read first from a late 
 speech made by the President of the 
 
Confederate States, Jefferson Davis, at 
 Jackson, Miss : 
 
 " After what has happened during the last two 
 years, my ouly wonder is that we consented to live 
 for so Ions a time in association with such mis- 
 creants, and have loved so much a (Jovernment 
 rotten to the core. Were it evor to be proposed 
 again to enter into a Union with such a people. I 
 Could no more consent to it than to trust myself 
 in a den Oi thieves." 
 
 The Richmond Dispatch clinches this 
 by saying : 
 
 " We warn the Democrats and Conservatives of 
 the North to dismiss from their minds, nt once the 
 MISEKABLE DELUSION that the South can ever con- 
 sent to enter again, upon any terms, the old 
 Union ; " that '' if the Aorth will allow us to write 
 the Constitution ourselves, and give us every 
 guarantee we would ask, we would sooner be un- 
 der the Government of England or France " 
 
 Again the Richmond Whig of the 10th 
 says : 
 
 " We have committed many errors in our treat- 
 ment of the Yankees. Not the least has been in 
 regarding them as something better than they 
 really are- They are by nature menials, and 
 
 FITTED only FOR MENIAL DUTIES- ThEY ARE IN 
 OPEN FLAGRANT INSURRECTION AGAINST THEIR 
 NATURAL LORDS AND MASTERS, THE GENTLEMEN OF i 
 
 THE South." I 
 
 One more quotation, and that from a 
 leader in the Richmond Enquirer on Val- 
 landigham's late great speech : I 
 
 ''If they repudiate the debt they have contract 
 ed, and abandon the government they established, 
 and recant vows, and break pledges, and eat dirt, 
 it is well; we shall be charmed; the movement 
 will suit us perfectly ; and although we shall not 
 exactly respect the actors in that affair, yet we 
 shall not be unwilling to trade with them— hold- 
 ing our noses a little— not to show them all suit- 
 able civilities— but at a proper distance." I 
 
 "Eat dirt" — that's good. Are peace 
 Democrats •willing to do that? Are Sen- 
 ators willing to compromise on such terms? 
 I would not have believed it, had I not 
 heard the speech of the Senator from 
 Seneca. He is willing to compromise, 
 and great God — upon what terms ? I 
 Itope it will be put upon record and sent 
 out to the loyal people of Ohio and of 
 the North, that the Senator from Seneca, 
 speaking for the Democracy of Ohio, has 
 stated upon this floor, that he is willing 
 to compromise with the South hy permit- 
 ting slavery to spread over and occupy 
 every inch of the ierritory of the States of 
 the free North! So spoke not Washing- 1 
 ton, so spoke not Jefferson and the other 
 great fathers of the Republic, who left! 
 upon record their testimony against hu- 
 man slavery ! So spoke not Daniel Web- 
 ster, who declared, he would '■'■never con- 
 sent to the extension of the area of slave- 
 ry in the United States ! " • So spoke not 
 2 
 
 glorious old Henry Clay, when on a 
 memorable occasion, he uttered these elo- 
 quent words : 
 
 " I have said that I never could vote for it my- 
 self 'and \ repeat, that I never Can and never 
 
 WILL vote, and NO earthly power ever WILL 
 
 make me vote, to spread slavery over ter- 
 ritory WHERE slavery DOES NOT NOW EXIST.' 
 
 Mr. Lano. — Would not the Senator 
 sooner have slavery than lose the Union ? 
 
 Mr. GuNCKEL. — " Liberty and Union, 
 one and inseparable," said Webster, and 
 so say I. 
 
 Mr. Lang. — But how if presented aa 
 an alternative ? 
 
 Mr. GuNCKEL. — That alternative nev- 
 er will come. Thank God, we can put 
 down the rebellion, restore the Union, and 
 still retain our liberties. 
 
 THE CHIVALRY OF THE SOtTTH. 
 
 And to whom would the Senator yield 
 up to the curse of slavery, the territory 
 consecrated to freedom by the blood of 
 our fathers? To the villains and traitors 
 who have murdered our fathers, sons and 
 brothers and desecrated the bodies of our 
 dead. Senators have grown pathetic over 
 the imprisonment of Dr. Olds. Why no 
 expressions of sympathy for the four hun- 
 dred Southern Union men, of whona the 
 papers tell us this morning, many of 
 them over eighty years of age, who are 
 now suffering in rebel prisons for no of- 
 fense but loving the old Union and the 
 old flag. Why no sympathy for the 
 Union men and women of East Tennes- 
 see, Northern xVlabama and Texas, driven 
 from their homes, hunted down by blood 
 hounds, imprisoned, murdered, because of 
 their loyalty to the government of their 
 fathers. Why not a word of indignation 
 at the rebels for their inhuman and bar- 
 barous treatment of our own sick, wound- 
 ed and dying soldiers ? Why not a word 
 of denunciation for their infernal conduct 
 in desecrating the bodies of our dead ? — 
 The Senator from Ashland laughs — does 
 he think these things funny ? 
 
 Mr. Kenney. — I laugh to think any- 
 body would believe such ridiculous stories. 
 
 Mr. GuNCKEL. — If the Senator will- 
 not believe what has so frequently been 
 told by our officers and men and Union 
 refugees from the South, he will believe 
 the Report of the Investigating Commit- 
 tee appointed by the Senate of the United 
 
IP 
 
 States, which upon the testimony of men 
 like Governor Sprague, of Khode Island, 
 reported that after the battle of Manassas, 
 the rebels disinterred the bodies of many 
 of our dead and cut off in some instusces, 
 bones to be used as personal ornaments 
 for chivalric Southern ladies, and in others, 
 •heads to be turned into drinking cups for 
 aise at a marriage festival I 
 
 A FEW QUESTIONS FOR V.ALLANDIGHAM 
 DEMOCRATS. 
 
 But to return, why this opposit'on to 
 simple resolutions in favor of sustaining 
 the Government in this her struggle for 
 life ? Why these quibbles as to constitu- 
 tional and law quest ons ? Why these 
 denunciations of the President and those 
 laboring with him to preserve the integ- 
 rity of the Union ? Why this want of 
 sympathy with the suffering Union men 
 at the South and with our brave soldiers 
 in the field? Wliy su;h public state- 
 ments as that made this morning by the 
 Senator from Seneca, that the rebels had 
 whipped us in nine battles out of every 
 ten, since the war began ? Why so mis- 
 8 ate the facts and so dispar ige the ex- 
 ploits of our gallant army '( Why reprint 
 in all the democratic papers of the State 
 the speeches of Vallandigh im, Cox & Co., 
 and send them by the thousands into the 
 army ? Why such persistent exaggeration 
 of the expenses of the war and of the 
 probable amount of future taxes ? Why 
 republish at so great length the slander- 
 ■ous editorials of the London Times and 
 other foreign papers, which sympathize 
 ■with the rebels? Why give just now 
 with such minuteness and detail, accounts 
 lof the revolt at VV^arsaw in resistance of 
 the Russian draft? Why denounce as 
 illegal, unjust, oppressive, etc., the Con- 
 scription act ? 
 
 For what all these things are intended^ 
 I leave others to determine. But what 
 their effect has been, is only too manifest. 
 First : It has poisoned the minds of m my 
 honest, loyal people at home, weakened 
 their support to the Grovernment, created 
 divisions as to paltry questions of party, 
 prevented enlistments and withdrawn in 
 part that active moral support which loyal 
 people at home should give to our brave 
 men in the field. Second : It has disheart- 
 ened, discouraged, and in some degree, 
 
 demoralized the army, encouraged deser- 
 tion and insubordination and so postpone(i 
 victory and an early and honorable peace. 
 But here I am reminded of a remark of 
 the Senator i'rom Clermont, to wit : — 
 '• There are no secret political societies in 
 the West to discourage enlistments and 
 desertions — no Knights of the (Joldea 
 Circle in Ohio or Indiana — its all chip 
 trap." Is it " clap trap " with Juhn U. 
 Brown and others in Indiana now under 
 sentence of death? Is it "clap trap" 
 with those men who appeared before the 
 United States Court at Indianapolis, and 
 acknowledged they belonged to tlie Order, 
 but p'ead that they could not tell its pur- 
 poses without criminaling themselves? Is 
 it " clap trap " with tho.'-e officers in the 
 army who have been disgraced ibr their 
 connection with the Order? Is it " clap 
 trap" with the 109th Illinois Kegiment, 
 which has been disbanded, because pois- 
 oned by this treasonable organization? 
 
 But I am asked whether there is not 
 a secret Republican society in Ohio, or- 
 ganized to put down, by force of arms, 
 the Democratic party, and whether the 
 society in Columbus has not four hundred 
 muskets ready for that purpose? I an- 
 swer, and with all frankness and honesty, 
 that I know of no such secret organiza- 
 tion, and that I do not believe that there 
 are any such in this city or State. For 
 myself, I never have been, am not now, 
 and never expect to be a member of any 
 secret political organization of any kind 
 whatever. 
 
 I was speaking of the effect of the 
 preaching of Vallandigham's doctrines ; 
 I claim. Third: That it has encouraged 
 the rebels to preseverein their treasonable 
 purposes to dismember this great Repub- 
 lic. I verily believe that if it had not 
 been for Vallandigham and his followers, 
 we would months ago have crushed the 
 rebellion and forced an honorable peace. 
 Do you doubt it? Read the following 
 from the Knoxville (Tenn.) Register, and 
 see what the rebels themselves say on the 
 subject : 
 
 "Were it not for the utter demoralization of th® 
 Union armies ; were it not that tlie quasi rebel- 
 lion of the Governors of New Jersey and New 
 York had effected Burnside's army as thoroughly 
 as that of Rosecrans', which has felt more serious- 
 ly the influence of Richardson, Bright and Val- 
 landigham ; were these Union forces as brave and 
 devoted to the cause they have espoused as they 
 
11 
 
 were twelve rainths azo. Brass's army would now ' 
 ui'cupy Chattanooga, Marietta, or Atlanta. In all i 
 thise considerations wo find the inducements in- \ 
 fluoncing Congress to enact a most stringent law, ! 
 bringing into the field the whole population of the 
 South capable of bearing arms," 
 
 But, Mr. Presideut, I have already de- 
 tained you too long. Let me, in conclu- 
 sion, beg my Democratic friends to leave 
 the new and come back to the old faith; 
 to leave Valhuidigham and come back to 
 Douglas. Said that great and good man, 
 (and it was among the last of his public 
 utterances :) 
 
 *' Then we have a solemn duty — to maintain the 
 government- The greater the unanimity, the 
 speedier the day of peace. * . * f Let us lay 
 aside all criminations and recrim'nations as to the 
 origin of these difficulties. When we shall have 
 a country, with the United States flag floating 
 over it, and respected on every inch of American 
 soil, it will then be time enough to ask who and 
 what brought all this upon us. *. * * There 
 are only two sides to the question. Every man 
 must be for the United States or against it.— 
 There can be no neutrals in this war, only patri- 
 ots and traitors " 
 
 Which side will you take? For or 
 against your country '? " Patriots or trai- 
 tors " — which are you? Was ever truth 
 more opportune than this : "The greater 
 oar unanimity, the speedier the day of 
 peace." We are at war — we can not com- 
 
 promke — we most figr*? it out. Unite 
 with us, and we will speedily put down 
 the rebellion, restore the Union, and with 
 it, the blessings of peace. Separate from 
 us, and while you cannot stop, nor even 
 change the war, you only protract its du- 
 ration and prolong its evils. 
 
 A few weeks ago and all looked dark 
 and gloomy, but thanks to a kind Provi- 
 dence, a great change — a great reaction 
 has taken place. The people have taken 
 the sober, second thought — the world has 
 witnessed the second great awakening. — 
 The people, like their brave and gallant 
 soldiers in the field, have become '■'■terribbj 
 in earnest, earnest to conquer and destroy 
 armed rebels, earnest to overcome force 
 with force, earnest in the detestation of 
 cowardly traitors at home, earnest in will 
 and power to overcome all who desire the 
 nations ruin." Let us but continue thuiS 
 united, earnest, determined, and all will 
 soon be well. The rebellion will be put 
 down, our Union restored, our liberties 
 preserved and peace, with all its attead- 
 ent blessings, secured to us and to our 
 children. 
 
 Ws 
 
u 
 
 ttl60 -^«! 
 

 
 "^^o* 
 
 * O 
 
 
 
 4^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•>f,<i>^ 
 
 ^•/ %*^.'\,*^ %'^^'\°'' V^"V* ' 
 
 ' • / ■» 
 
 
 
 '^o<^" 
 
 K^^ ^ 
 
 
 I'X c°\.i.i^.> ,/..ii£i'.\ /.g.;^^.> 
 
 
 
 
 «' 
 
 
 
 J- -3