The subjoined article is from the Jefferson county (New York)
The editor is probably one of those who originally urged ‘"active measures,"’ but who now, appalled at the Lincoln
programme, finds that there is a more practicable method of quelling what he terms ‘"rebellion,"’
There are many in our midst who clamor for more blood.
Their Christian feeling is: ‘"Let the invading army move South--let it move quickly.
Let the thunderbolts of war fly thick and fast.
Let the avenging besom of Northern wrath sweep the rebels from the land, and bury them in the waters of the Southern Gulf
Let the iron wheels of war move over crushed bones and bleeding hearts.
Let them be American bones and American hearts.
Do not touch an African, or an Indian, or a Mexican.
Let our grand armies march.
Let the soldiers burn wheat fields and houses.
Let them depopulate villages and cities.
Let rapine go hand in hand with its twin brother, slaughter.
Give freedom to negroes and death to white men!"’
Does any Republican object to this description of what he desires?
Let him ask himself if he has not desired all these things.
If he has not, he does not live up to the bloody spirit of his party; but if he has, let him ask himself if it is patriotic, or Christian
, or manly.
By slow and unwilling reports, the public are made aware of the fact that our soldiers have been guilty of revolting acts of vandalism — acts which the commanding Generals
have deeply regretted in their official reports — acts against which several of them have issued military orders.
A Northern soldier having in charge a rebel, and finding it a little difficult to bring him into quarters, runs him through with his bayonet.
What bloody article of war authorizes such a deed of murder?
Civilization requires that prisoners should be treated with humanity, and not killed outright and left to rot like dogs on the spot where the assassin used his weapon.
Who would surrender himself a prisoner if he expected immediate death?
Better run the chances of the fight, and fight while he lives, than surrender up his arms and submit to be butchered.
We are told that to compromise a peace would be demoralizing.
Are not these things demoralizing?
What pure female heart, looking through delicate eyes that have not yet witnessed the suns of fifteen summers, will receive additional evidences of ‘"man's humanity to man,"’ by reading of such brutalities?
What Christian clergyman, even though he may have opened the bloody mouth of war in his pulpit, will think that these things are going to advance the cause of Christ
, or point men toward Heaven?
Yet, what Republican pulpit has thundered its anathemas against them?
What Republican voice has been uttered in condemnation?
We recognize the necessity of quelling rebellion; but we do not recognize the great necessity of putting out every idea of constitutional liberty, and every sentiment of Christian philanthropy and human sympathy.
After all that we have heard and read about ‘"cutthroats"’ and ‘"thieves"’ and ‘"vandals"’ and ‘"pirates,"’ we are yet very much inclined to look upon all American citizens as composing a portion of the civilized world.
Our efforts shall be directed towards the restoration of the whole great nation to its primeval purity and strength, and not for trampling over the rights of one section of the country, at the instigation of the fanatical and Cromwellian demands of a portion of another section.
We do not ask for more blood.
Blood will never cement a brotherly affection.
Every drop shed widens and swells the sea of separation.
You cannot shoot men into fraternal relations.
Every wielding of your swords, every pointing of your bayonets, every projections of your balls, only extends the breech.
However fierce any of us may be for fight, our difficulties, if ever settled, will be settled by a fraternal compromise.
Let every one who asks for more blood, satisfy himself that his demand does not result from his avenging vindictiveness.