How Democrats Would End The War.
An abolition contempory charges that the democracy constantly opposes the administration and the war, and yet never suggest any remedy for existing evils. It wishes to know what that party would do if it had the power — whether it would stop the war, recognize the Confederacy, or continue the conflict.
We think we are safe in asserting that, although there are various and diverse opinions held by conservative men on the question of the war and its settlements, there is in reality, no disagreement upon radical points. While democrats may differ as to the means, they are unanimous as to the end; and that end is an undivided country. Upon this one thing democrats everywhere are agree; in this respect there is no division of thought, no diversity of action. Of this fact there can be no dispute; nor, at the same time, do we think there is any doubt as to the means which the democratic party would favor to accomplish this result.
It is believed by conservative men that the prime cause which induced the secession of the South was the aggression of the anti-slavery party, which finally culminated in the accession of the government with avowed hostility to the South, with profession of disregard for the constitution, which it termed a covenant with hell and of one [unknown]ence to the promptings of pseudo philanthropy under the guise of "higher laws." Giving credence to the years of teachings and of threats indulged in by this party, the South deemed its safety endangered, and without waiting for an overt act of the new administration, it plunged into secession. Knowing this state of things, democrats believe that the first step to bring the South back to its allegiance should be to disposses the present party of its power. This is the very first step necessary to restore the Union, which democrats believe in, and is to day a leading principle in the policies of all conservative men. They believe that at the moment when this government shall be administered by national men, and not by a faction govering the country through the aid and for the benefit of New England, then will the resistance of the South cease.
In detail, the policy of the democracy, after gaining possession of the government, and thus removing the cause of the secession of the South, would be to remedy one by one the grievances inaugurated by the republican administration, and against which the South is fighting. They would offer the South the constitution, and with it guarantee that for all time the rights of the States under that constitution should be preserved inviolate.
What is the south fighting to-day? It is confiscation, the division of their land among negroes; against extermination; against elevation of an inferior race to quality; against the aggressions of a power that has availed itself of a convenient opportunity to attempt annihilation of the South and its institutions. Democrats would remove at once all these causes, and leave the South nothing to fight for. With nothing to complain of, with no grievances to be redressed, would the rebels continue the costly process of making war — of slaughtering and being slaughtered? We think not. Neither individuals nor nations fight for nothing.
Democrats have a policy — a very decided one; one which if put in a force would end the war in a day.
Summed up, it amounts solely and simply to this: give the South all her rights under the constitution, and guarantee those rights against the aggression of fanatical factions and minorities. This is the kind of coercion that democrats would use — a coercion that democrats would use — a coercion that would flank Atlanta, capture Richmond, bag Lee, and overrun the Confederacy in a week without the loss of a man or the expendature of a dollar. — [Chicago Times.