. [COPTRianTED. ] 
 
 THE »TRTJGOLE 
 
 FOR 
 
 liiBERTY IN AMERIC 
 
 WITH AN INQUIRY INTO THE DUTIES OF CHRISTIAN AND PATRICil^ M ^ 1 , c, 
 CITIZENS IN THE PRESENT CRISIS. \ 5t A^"* / §jl 
 
 J 
 
 Late Private of Co. K, Eighth Vermont Vols. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 Fellow-Citizens : 
 
 The time has been, if it is not now, when the professed friends of 
 Democratic hbertj in America approved of the straggle thma.hwM 
 our Revolutionary ancestors passed, while endeavoring to found I free 
 republic, based on the inalienable rights of all men to°life, libertv .nd 
 
 he pursuit of happiness, under the restraint of wholesome Snd a 
 ju t government, instituted by the people with the sanction of the 
 Almighty and deriving its just authority from the consent of the ma 
 jority of he people to its real justice and divine sanction o far as 
 that people, or nation thus adopting any system of laws is Concerned ' 
 These men, the professed friends of American liberty have tau4t 
 us, that, although it cost a seven years' war, involvmc; the ^ o^ 
 many valuable lives, much sufering by the innocent and the .u Itv 
 as well as the banl,rupting of the national credit and cur eLfan^d 
 untold horrors, carnage, desolations and miseries in the^iecessaiT Pro 
 gress of tha struggle for freedom and independence, that the^.?ea 
 ?^ f u^r"',''-^"^'^"'^^ prospered and approved the cause of America ^Ind 
 was the man whom God raised up to fight our country's battles ancLain 
 
 ^" might ware, 
 
 O'er the land of the free, and the home of the brave." 
 
 f.n.n^' U' «^ VS^nowledge, with gratitude to God, that such is the 
 fact. God himself did shield and defend the brave old hemes bv who e 
 
 thlZXZ:j.\'''"f' 'f"^"-^^^^^' ^^^ ^^ "^-^ patient enLTane 
 I^ZaJ^^ heart.crushing sorrow, in spite of ten thousand depres- 
 sing and despainng reverses and defeats, our national liberties were 
 
 But what is the principle upon which the great God approved a cause 
 which produced so much bloodshed, strife, !nd misery ?^ 
 fl.; A 1 \?^ conservative principle of the universe-that upon which 
 the Almighty, as a just and merciful Father and God, aiwavs alts in 
 overruling the affairs of all worlds-that of securing the .rrtest pos 
 sible good of the greatest possible number of his creatures" ^ 
 
 I bus stood the case with the nation at the time our fathers drew 
 their Kevolutionary blades: an evil greater than war threa ened thei> 
 rights as men and as British subjects-an evil which threatened thi 
 representative rights and liberties of all mankind, which arT^^^^ 
 and common, and cannot be stricken down in one place, or tn on, per 
 
.4 
 X £'/i 
 
 son, even, without endangering the rights of all others. In view of this 
 encroaching tyranny of the British throne, Patrick Henry but breathed 
 the common though dormant, sentiment when he exclaimed in those 
 thrilling and immortal words — "I know not what course others may 
 take, but as for me, give me Liberty, or give me Death." Desiring to 
 throw off the galling yoke of tyranny that was imposed upon them, and 
 estabhsh in America an asylum and city of refuge for the oppressed of 
 all lands, who might flee to her for protection, these noble men struck- 
 vigorous blows for civil and religious freedom, pledging to each other, 
 for success in the struggle, their "lives, their fortunes, and their sacred 
 honor." God sustained tfiem in the struggle, chastising them in mea- 
 sure for their wickedness, (as he is now chastising their sons,) but giv- 
 ing them final victory, that they might escape the wrongs of tyranny, 
 and that the cause of the world's liberties, of human rights in general, 
 might be advanced and finally secured, and the present and eternal 
 welfare of mankind be promoted thereby. 
 
 I have a question to ask here, of every man, woman, and child in 
 <(•• this audience: it is this— do you all believe that our Kevolutionary 
 • • fathers did right to fight against the king of England, and was the 
 Almighty justified in giving final success to their cause? 
 
 I wish every one to vote on this question — one way or the other — 
 but be careful how you vote ! 
 
 To those who say that they do not believe this, I have simply to say 
 that as they have sided with the tories of the Revolution, and with Brit- 
 ish tyranny as opposed to republican government and liberty, they 
 have no right to interfere with our republican institutions here, but 
 the most appropriate thing they can do is to emigrate to Enghnd, 
 Austria, or some other congenial monarchy, where they can aid the 
 cause of despotism in its eftbrts to crush the rights of man. Perhaps 
 they will find a stronger opponent of liberty, however, in Jefferson I, 
 than in any other tyrant. If so, they belong with him, or under him. 
 But I have a few words now for those who justify the Revolution- 
 ary struggle, but condemn our own; who garnish the sepulchres of the 
 fathers, while they charge the crime of murder upon their sons who 
 are fighting to preserve the government from the ruinous grasp of 
 domestic traitors. 
 
 You have admitted that it was a noble, a manly, and a righteous 
 work for our lathers to fight for their liberties, and for the rights of 
 all men, rather than tamelv submit to be made slaves; and since it 
 was just that they and all mankind should be free, you have admitted 
 that it was just and right for God and all good men and ministers to 
 encourage our fathers to figiit bravely, and to the bitter end. trusting 
 in God for victory. And while the British began the war, an<l carried 
 it on for the purpose of encroaching upon the liberties of the American 
 people, you have charged tlie blame on the British, where it belonged. 
 Now^ then, if I can demonstriite to you, as I propose to do, that the 
 present war, on the piirt of the United States, is waged for the preserva- 
 tion of the same government, and principles of government, and ior 
 the vindication of the same great rights of men, and broad priuciples 
 of equal liberty among all races of men, that our fathers openly pro- 
 claimed to the world ; and if I can also prove that the rebels and their 
 friends are aiming to destroy both the government and the liberties 
 bequeathed u.^ by our Ikthers, you cannot by any possibility resist the 
 
conclusion that as God and eternal principles are always the same, and 
 our fathers' cause ivas right, aivl approved of God, so, therefore, as our 
 cause is the same in fact and in principle with that of our fathers, 
 our cause must also be riglit and approved of God, while the guilt of 
 the bloodshed and misery must rest mainly on the heads of the rebel 
 opponents of liberty, and their friends. If, to avoid this conclusion, 
 you change your position, and deny the justice of the first war for 
 liberty in America, you must charge Washington with murder and 
 the Almighty with injustice; and by so doing side with tories, traifors, 
 and the devil. If you a.re bold enough, or bad enough, to publicly 
 avow this to be 3^0 ur position, you are either more honest or more 
 wicked than I think you are. 
 
 There is but one way, then, for you logically to resist my conclusion, 
 and that is by disproving my minor proposition, that the present war 
 is waged for the preservation of the same government, principles, rights 
 and liberties that our fathers fought to establish. Here, then, is the 
 turning point in the grand argument by which the friends or enemies 
 of the United States government stand or fall. 
 
 I propose, then, in the settlement of this question, to investigate, 
 for a few moments, in detail, some of the chief principles for which 
 our fathers contended, comparing them with those involved in our 
 present struggle. 
 
 Some have said that our fathers fought for the rights and liberties 
 of white men alone; and to establish a government under which hlach 
 men should have no rights that white men are bound to respect. I 
 repel this base insinuation with these three fixcts. 1. They never said 
 any such thing as that, nor anythim] that would warrant any man to 
 conclude that they did not intend America to be a country where even 
 the Hottentot, in common with all other persons, of any other nation, 
 might freely enjoy, under the restraints of just laws, the liberties with 
 which Heaven has invested him and all mankind. 2. They did say 
 things, which, being true, would imply that they would themselves be 
 guilty of crime, against both God and men, if they should attempt to 
 found a government where one race of men might be legally robbed of 
 their rights by another; yes, things which justify any slave in cutting 
 the master's throat who stands between that slave and his God-given 
 rights. 
 
 What did they say? As they went into the fight they declared 
 that "Liberty or Deaih" was with them the. only alternative; be slaves 
 they would not. So, too, they affirmed their adherence to this self-evi- 
 dent truth that "liberty" is a God -given right of all men, a right of which 
 none can ever be deprived, since it is "inalienable," no matter by 
 whom he may be restrained Irom the enjoyment of that right. At 
 this doctrine of our fathers, that "all men are created equal, being 
 endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights ; that among 
 these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," the rebels have 
 directed their keenest dart-^. Alex. II. Stephens, Vice President of the 
 so-called Southern Confederacy, has spoken of it as the "atheistic red 
 republican doctrine of the Declaration of Independence," and charges it 
 with being the cause of all the troubles that have sprung from med- 
 dling with slavery. By the way our modern abolitionists, as "cau- 
 sers of tlie war," are apparently in good conijiany — a company evidently 
 not incliued to favor slavery when they wont into the fight. And 
 
■when they came out of it with victory on their banners, they took upon 
 them the labor of organizing a government for the preservation of the 
 liberties they had achieved, in the preamble to the constitution of which 
 they declared it to be their object in establishing this government, to 
 •■'establish justice," and "secure the blessings of liberty to (themselves) 
 and (their) posterity." And in the amendments to the constitution 
 they provided that "wo jjersoT^'^ (without distinction of color or race) 
 should "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process 
 of law." 
 
 3. Many colored men were among those who fought in the Revolu- 
 tionary war ; and it is folly to suppose that they fought to achieve 
 their own slavery, or th© white man's liberty alone. Many colored 
 people, also, formed a part of the "people of the United States" who 
 "ordained the constitution" to secure "the blessings of liberty to (them- 
 selves) and (their) posterity." 
 
 Besides, should we admit that white men alone framed the constitu- 
 tion, or spoke through it, to secure their own liberties and those of 
 'Uheir jjosterity f^ yet we must admit, that people of color are expressly 
 included in the terms of the constitution as the heirs of all "the bless- 
 ings of liberty"' — for it is an undeniable fact, that thousands of this 
 class in our country are really "the posterity" of the whiiK men who 
 ordained the constitution. If the children are illegitimate, this makes 
 it bad for the moral character of the fathers, but does not militate 
 against the constitutional and "inalienable" rights of the children. 
 
 As great stress is laid, by opposers of the war, upon an assumed 
 difference between the present and the Revolutionary struggle — as if 
 that were altogether a -white man^s and this a "neyro's war^^ — it will do 
 no harm, I thmk, to show that the " inevitable negro" and his rights 
 were deeply involved in the first struggle, and that the Revolution 
 was not a while 'maiis war lor white mtn's liberties merely. Those 
 who are tired of the war because the doctrine of human rights is so 
 broad and impartial that, like God, it has "no respect of persons," and 
 will not exclude any man from the enjoyment of liberty on account of 
 his color, would act more consistently with their professions, than, while 
 justifying the Revolutionary struggle for the rights of all men, and at 
 the same time condemning our struggle for the rights of all men, if 
 they were either to grind off their own noses and condemn the Revo- 
 lution, on the ground that they want nothing in common with the 
 hated black ;' or, if they should leave their noses in proper position, and 
 admit, as the}'' should, that ours is also a noble struggle to preserve 
 the right of all men to enjoy civil and religious freedom in our glo- 
 rious republic. 
 
 In showing what the Revolutionary war was not waged for, I liave necessarily 
 shown sometliiug ol' wliat it was wagnd lor. In showing that it was not fought to estab- 
 lish slavery, 1 have shown that our fathers vindicated the right of all mankind to equal 
 and universal liherty — liberty to do right, to worship and obey God, to choose their 
 own rulers and forms of government, and enjoy, under the protection of just laws, 
 those inestimable rights of conseieuee, of free speweh, freedom of suffrage, and of the 
 press, as well us of personal freedom, to which tlie laws of tiod and of nature entitle 
 them, without, beinj; subject to the whims or caprice of a despotic and irresponsible 
 monarch. They did not, however, figlit i6 achieve a license for ary man, or Ijody of 
 men, t» do wrong ; to ilespiso civil government ; rob other men of their equal rights ; nor 
 yet to violate the laws of Ood or of the land, without punishment accordingly. The 
 "lil)erty" to "rob other men of their e<iual liberty,'' is one for which our modern rebels, 
 alone, have the distinguished (disjhouor of lighting. Our /hihirs never rccoi/riized the 
 fxiKdiitp of' anif such rii/ht, either in private individuals, uobles, kings, conveutious, 
 or iu sovereign and republican Blates. 
 
Believing the proper "power" or authority of civil governments to "execute ti-n© 
 judgment" or justice — that is, to uphold and execute just laws — to be "ordained of 
 God," they were loth to attack even an unjust government M'ilh carnal weapons, until 
 repeated acts of injustice and tyranny manifested a determination, on the part of the 
 king of England, to reduce the people of the Colonies to government by his absolute 
 and despotic will alone; when, taking as their maxim ''Resistance to tyranny is 
 obediance to God," tlK^y contested with the sword the assumed "divine right" of 
 kings to do that which the Almighty had forbidden them to do. 
 
 They resisted the attempt of the British government to impose an involuntary tax 
 on their tea, on the ground that taxation without representation, and without their 
 consent, was unjust, and an act of war upon their rights as men and as British sub- 
 jects. I may observe here, that "what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gan- 
 der;" or, in other words, what was unjust to white men then is also unjust to black 
 men now — although it looks as if we had "advanced backwards" a trille, in this 
 respect, by taxing our colored citizens, while we refiise to allow them the right of 
 suffrage, or the least voice or representation in the government. And we shall not be 
 thoroughly anti-slavery, or repulilican, in this matter, at least, until we come fully up 
 to the grandeur of the Revolutionary principle, and grant representation to all wliom 
 we tax. This will not justify any pro-slavery man, however,, in refusing to assist the 
 government, because it is not quite as anti-slavery in some points as the fathers were. 
 The late abolition of color distinctions between witnesses in the federal courts shows 
 hopeful progress in the right direction. The government is getting right in the main, 
 for it begins to see universal liberty in the constitution ; and is making a practical 
 application, as it long since should have done, of the principles of the declaration and 
 of the constitution to the actual affairs of the nation ; so that we may confidently hope 
 that liberty, justice, and the inalienable rights of man, will not be treated as unmean- 
 ing abstractions, to mention which, in the presence of slavery, has for so long been 
 criminal in the eyes of many. 
 
 Our fathers had sufficient experience of the despotism which might be practiced on 
 the people, even in a limited monarchy, by a sovereign who disregarded the rights of 
 his subjects and the provisions of the constitution, to lead them to prefer a republic, 
 a government of the pet p'e, rather than a despotic one ; and so they sought to found 
 a government that shouid be so broaii* and general in its character, so mild, and yet 
 so rigidly conservative of the equal rights &f all classes of its citizens, so subject to the 
 will of the constitutional majority, so completely filled with the inspiration of impartial 
 justice, liberty and the essential principles of free government, and so capable of 
 expansion, -by constitutional ameniments, to meet the new wants of the people, and 
 to keep pace so exactly with the progress of the age, that it should never require to 
 be revolutionized by the bayonet, but only by the ballot ; and so might stand, through 
 all ages of time, as a monument of wisdom, and beacon light of liberty to all nations 
 of men. 
 
 Alas ! that the madness of a few political idiots, who have grossly misapprehended 
 the spirit and letter of our noble constitution, and vainly imagined that the spirit of 
 free self-government authorized them to destroy the liberties of others, on the plea of 
 governing themselves in their own way, should have succeeded so far as to cast their 
 flaming firebrands of rebellion into the grand old temple of popular liberty in America, 
 placing its very existence in jeopardy. 
 
 Let me call your attention for a few moments to the great question of self-govern- 
 ment, as involved in the constitution and framework of our American republic. We 
 have long boasted that our long-continued success, and general respect for, and obedi- 
 ence to, the laws of our own making, under the United States government, has been a 
 living proof of the capacity of the common people, in enlightened nations, to govern 
 themselves, on democratic principles, without the aid of despots born to inherit the 
 throne. 
 
 It is vitally essential, however, to the existence of every democracy, or republic, 
 that the minority should absolutely acquiesce in the decisions of the coHstitutional 
 majority at the "ballot-box. If, therefore, in any republic, the minority succeed in 
 reversing the decisions of the majority, by force, in defiance of the constitution, they 
 by so doing destroy the constitution, overthrow the republic and its government, 
 ttstablish military despotism in its stead, and the experiment of self-government in 
 that republic is of course a failure. Now, then, since the rebels in our own government 
 have appealed to force, to bayonets, in order to resist and overthrow the decision of 
 the majority, constitutionally made at the ballot-box, they have struck a vital blow at 
 republican government and libeity, in our own government and through the world ; 
 and if they succeed in gaining their object, by forcibly overriding the decisions of the 
 majority — no matter whether they are right or wrong — the moment that they do thus 
 succeed, that moment our constitution is overthrown, the government of the United 
 States is destroyed, and our experiment at tjelf-;;overnment, as a nation, becomes a 
 failure, and is at an end. 
 
To be sure, the loyal States may declare themselves free and independent republi- 
 ean States, or they may form a new national republic, and renew the expt'viment of 
 self-government agaiu, in another form; but the present federal government, that 
 f )rmed by the wisdom and cemented by the blood of our Revolutionai y sires, will not, 
 cannot, survive the success of this robrilion. And hence, too, it follows that the rebels 
 cannot form any other but a despotic government, until they entirely repudiate their 
 own rebellion, by re-establishing tlie autliority and supremacy of the ballot-box over 
 bayonets — since this is the vital principle and very foundation of all republics. 
 
 1 perfectly agree with my democratic friends, that the present administration doei 
 not in all tilings represent absolute perfection — and that some tilings might probably 
 have been done better than they have been, provided we had better men both at the 
 hea I and at the foundation of public affairs — but the same might be said with equal 
 truth of every other administration, from Washington to the present. 
 
 But, in view of the great principles of republican government involved in the fact of 
 rebellion, I can say tliis, that if the administration of Abraliam Lincoln succeeds in 
 crushing out this diabolical and foolish rebellion against republican liberty in our 
 nation, by freeing and arming every slave, andconiiscatiug the proi:)erty of every rebel, 
 in order to preserve the right of the constitutional majority of the American people to 
 regulate the affairs of their own government in their own way, it will, by so doing, 
 save the rebellious States from a despotic government, and consummate a greater good 
 for our entire nation, and for the general welfare and liberties of mankind, than it has 
 ever been witliin the reach of human opportunity heretofore to accomplish. 
 
 Do you ask how this can be? I answer, because there has never been such a for- 
 midable blow aimed, by any human power, directly at the essential principles of human 
 liberty and equality, as that now being struck by the so-called southern confederacy, 
 wliich seeks to erect a "government" on American soil, based on a God-detying lie — 
 the false claim of one class of human creatures to a divine right to hold property in 
 other cla:^ses of their fellow-men. 
 
 And here let me say, that, as the southern confederacy, should it succeed, would be 
 the first and only government in the world based on the "right to hold men in slave- 
 ry," there is strong reason in tins fact to justify the belief that it will never succeed — 
 only in destro3Mng itself. To argue that it is right, only, of all human governments, 
 is to insult the wisdom of all past ages, asperse the character of the Supreme Ruler, 
 and declare that "all the fouii<lations of the earth are out of course;" or, that the 
 principles of eternal justice have been universally and totally misapprehended, both 
 by the masses of mankind and the wisest men of all ag(;s. 
 
 I trust I have shown that the principles of free government — independent of the 
 right or wrong of human slavery — are with ihe government of the United States, as 
 framed by our fathers, and as it is still transmitted to their sons. The government 
 we are now called uj)on to preserve from the violence of rebels, is the same government 
 for the establishmeMt of which our fathers fought, representing the same public liber- 
 ties, and the same inalienable rights of man. 
 
 If it was, therefore, right and just for our fathers to fight to establish it, it must be 
 equally rigJit for tlieir sons to iight to preserve it. 
 
 If it was their duty, as patriots and Christians, to pledge to each other "their lives, 
 their fortunes, and their sacred honor," for the achievement of American libeity, it is 
 equally our duty to do the same for its sacred preservation, as the heritage of millions 
 yet unborn, who will yet rise up and call that valor blessed, which, at the peril of all 
 we hold dear in this life, endeavors to ward off the parricidal hand of treason which 
 now seeks the nation's life. 
 
 God himself has authoiized and instituted just civil governments among men, and 
 has solemnly charged civil rulers with the duty of maintaining justice, by tlie laws 
 and penalties of government, by which they themselves become "a terror to evil doers, 
 and a praise to them that do wt 11." "15ut if thou do tliat which is evil, be afiaid; for 
 lie beareth not tlie sword in vain : for he is the minister of God, a revenger to exectite 
 wrath ("or punislimentj upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore you must needs be sub- 
 ject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake." This is the admonition of an 
 inspired apostle, after having acknowledged the awful majcNty of heaven-authorized 
 law, and of civil government, as "ordained of God." In his proper sphere, as the 
 minister of justice, as one authorized to uphold and execute those laws necessary to 
 the puklic peace and welfare, the civil ruler so far represents the authority of the 
 Ruler of the universe, \>y whose oidinaticui civil government exists, that "whoso 
 resiuteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God," and, in consequence, "shall 
 receive to himself damnation."" If to resist the civil power, in the exercise of its 
 proper functions, is to exjiose one's self to the penally of "damnation" at tlie hand of 
 (iod, for resisting him in his ordinance, it is evident that the path of duty must lie in 
 the opposite direction, since it is no man's duty to imrsue a course which God had 
 assureil him beforehand will result in damnation. 
 
 When any number of wicked and blood-thirsty men, then, unlawfully combine to 
 obstruct th« laws, overthrow the government, or commit crimes and outrages upon 
 
the persons and rights of the people, what is the duty of Christian and patriotic citi- 
 zens, when callnd upon by the civil autliority to assis^t in arresting thf'se criminals, 
 and in maintaining the government and laws — and by tliis, the liberties and riglits of 
 the pt:0})le, and the peace and good order of society? Suppose a di-eadt"ul murder had 
 just been committed in the neighborhood, and tlie murderer were to rush into tliis 
 house, flourishing a deadly weapon, and threatening the life of every person who 
 should attempt to arrest him, — who of yon all would refuse to assist the magistrate to 
 arrest him, at the p«ril of your life? Wiio of you would say that peace, humanity, or 
 the gospel, would require that the murderer be "let alone," and that justice, 
 the magistrate, law, and government, should abdicate, and basely yield to the will of 
 murderers, rather than incur the personal danger necessary to uphold the laws, and 
 secure the object for which laws are framed and governments exist — namely, the pro- 
 tection of the lives, liberties, hap^jiness and possessions of thu people. 
 
 Is any man so blind as not to see that mercy to the people, and the prevention of gene- 
 ral crime and bloodshed among them, reiiuire that the majesty of the law be upheld, 
 even if it became necessary, in order to do it, to shoot down the murderer upon the 
 spot, together with any number of men who should combine with force and arms to 
 prevent his arrest ? And who of you all would think of cliarging the guilt of the blood 
 thus shed upon an}' one except the murdeier and his friends, whose resistance to the 
 laws made it necessary to shed their blood in order to secure the euds of justice ? The 
 most tender-hearted Christian to be found among the "Peace Democracy," or elsewhere, 
 would consider himself justified before God and man, and as having performed an act 
 of kindness to the community, to be able to say, "my hand gave the murderer liis 
 moi tal wound, while he was about to take the life of the officer who was endeavoring 
 to arrest him." 
 
 In such case, the death penalty of the law is simply executed upon the criminal, 
 without a formal trial, upon his open conlession, by resisting the law, that he is an 
 outlaw, an enemy to society, and a man of murderous intention, who, as such, cer- 
 tainly deserves to die. 
 
 !^o, too, Mere a highwayman to assault you, demanding your money or your life, you 
 would each of you consider yourselves justified in taking his life, if necessary to 
 preserve yor own, and that on the double groviud that "self-preservation is the first 
 law of nature," and that the highwayman stood before you self-convicted of a capital 
 crime, by which his life was justly lorfeited to the law. 
 
 Hut if the right of self-preservation in an inditidiinl, gives him a right to take the 
 life of him who attempts to deprive him of his, and if the majesty of law in a small 
 towu or neighborhood requires that the lives of all who combine forcibly to defeat the 
 ends of justice, sliall be taken in order to maintain the public peace, if they will not 
 cease their resistance, and sue for pubbc mercy ; how much stronger a right of 
 self-preservation, by all the means that God has placed within its reach, has the 
 government of a great nation, when its life is threatened, ah hough ten thousand 
 armed villains combine to ob>truct the laws, insult and trample upon the majesty of 
 law and of the sovereign people, and to overthrow their government and liberties 1 
 
 And if it be the duty of Christian ciiizens, in a small town like ours, to assist the 
 sheriff to quell a riot, or arrest a criminal, at the cost or peril of their own lives or 
 those of the criminals and rioters, how much more, since the inteiests of society are 
 so much more extensively involved in the aft'airs of a nation than in those of a town, 
 how much more, I say, is it the duty of Christian citizens to assist the chief magistrate 
 of their country in quelling a national riot or rebellion, and in preserving the integrity 
 and majesty of the national government, liberty, constitution and laws. 
 
 What would you do with the man who should stand by in the case of the murderer, 
 above suppose'', and counsel the officers of the law to "keep the peace," and "use no 
 violence, lest they should bring the blood of the defiant murderer upon them" — mean- 
 ing thertby that the murderer ought not to be arrested, unless he will voluntarily sur- 
 render himself, and that it would be wrong to take his life in order to subdue his mur- 
 derous resistance? You would arrest him as a mover of sedition, or send him to the 
 insane asylum, undoubtedly; and should he insist upon it that he was a victim of 
 tyranny, and that the liberties of the country were destroyed, because he could not be 
 allowed to disturb the public peace and stir up a riot by abusing the freedom of speech, 
 you would onfy consider it a further proof of his insanity, and a justification of his 
 "suppression" as a dangerous ai-ui seditious character. 
 
 And are the supporters of Vallandiguam'B assumed right to make public speeches, 
 in a time of war, which threatens the destruction of all the liberties of the people, — 
 speeches that tend to encourage the enemies of the country to continue their rebellion 
 until either themselves or the nation and its liberties are destroyed — any less insane 
 than would be the other man, whih; they insist on th«! right of a private citizen to 
 abuse his personal liberties to the extent of destroying the public liberties of the entire 
 nation ? 
 
8 
 
 These questions are important, pertinent to the case, and should lead every true 
 American, unbiased by partizan prejudices, calmly to review the whole subject, with 
 the view to the solution of the question, "what is the duty I owe to the cause of liberty 
 in America, and of the Union created to preserve and defend it ?" 
 
 The base insinuation that the nation ought to have sold the liberties of unborn gen- 
 erations which are held in trust for them by the gpneral government, and abdicated 
 its own rights and those of the American people, by compromising the principles of 
 eternal justice, the inalienable rights of man, and the essential principles of free 
 government, by basely yielding to the unconstitutional demands of a treasonable and 
 law-defying minority, at the point of the bayonet, rather than repel those bayonets by 
 the federal power, smells so strongly of baseness, treachery, and brimstone, that it 
 suggests the instance of a famous compromise, proposed to a noble king, by a base 
 usurper, the reading of which, from ancient records, may both form and suggest a 
 fitting reply to the entire scheme of "compromise" — which is but another name for 
 selling our principles and rights to the devil, or his servants, in order to avoid the 
 trouble of maintaining them against their opposition. Muti. IV: S, 10 — "Again the 
 devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth kim all the king- 
 doms of the world, and the glory of them, and saith unto him, all these things will 
 I give thee if thou wilt fall down and worship me. Then saith Jesus unto him, get 
 thee hence, Satan : for it is written, thou shalt wor.ship the Lord thy God, and him 
 only shalt thou serve." 
 
 Allow me to suggest, in conclusion, that as Christ was our example, " tempted in 
 all points like as we are, yet without sin," it may not be wrong for us, as Christian 
 patriots, when tempted by the devil of politics, or any other devil, to sell our princi- 
 ples, or leave the path of righteousness, in order to escape the consequences to which 
 they expose us, to say with the Master, " Get thee hence, Satan." 
 
 Better to "resist unto blood, in striving against sin," than to become a servant of 
 the devil, on any terms that he is able to offer. 
 
 NOTE TO THE READER.— The foregoing Address, delivered in substance, with 
 illustrative facts and remarks interspersed, in several places in Vermont, just l)efore 
 the Chicago nominations, was brought out in consequence of the following incident: — 
 Soon alter my return to my native State of New Hampshire, being on a visit to friends 
 in Haverhill, I was saluted upon the street by a ven'erable "Peace Democrat," who, 
 after learning that I was a returned volunteer, and getting my response to his query 
 as to "what I thought of the war," very patronizingly volunteered his opinion con- 
 cerning myself, all other volunteers, and aJl who staid at home but upheld and justi- 
 fied the war, the great mas.s of ministers .and church members included — which 
 opinion, he very frankly stated, was, that we were each and all of us "no better than 
 murderers." He admitted, however, that our Revolutionary fathers were justified in 
 their struggle for independence ; but contended there was a radical difference between 
 that and the present. I, however, "coukhrt see it." Within an hour from that time 
 a young scion of the Peace Democracy, also knowing that I was a returned volunteer, 
 publicly stated in the poet office that "he hoped to tTod the people of the South would 
 be strong enough to drive our folks all home, where they belonge<l, and where they 
 might learn to mind their own business." Can the reader wonder, that, being the 
 only (and yet unmarried and childless^ chili of a widowed, aged and infirm mother, 
 who had early enlisted to put down an unholy rebellion against tne liberties of the 
 nation — the rights which Copperheads have hitherto enjoyed included — I should think 
 this rather a dro/l reception, or that I should conclude that if these men were fair 
 samples of the mental or moral enlightenment of any considerable number of the 
 people in that section, that there was a call for missionary labor tliere, and that even 
 a ;3ri!-afe .soWiVr might tell them some things at least profitable for them to believe? 
 So the Address was written, delivered, is now printed, and ollered for sale. 
 
 Or can the reader feel at all uncertain, with the above declarations of "Democrats" 
 for a commentary, what is the precise value I ought to set upon the proffered ^*sympa- 
 thy^^ and "protection^' of the Chicago Convention.' 
 
 The writer is now out of health and out of employment, with a mother to support, 
 and he deems it nt«edless to say anything further to the friends of th» soldier and of 
 the administration, than that copies of this Address can be had in quantities, at the 
 rate of two dollars and fifty cents per hundred. Address, ("with cash enclosed, j 
 
 ALFRED W. EASTMAN, 
 
 Care of Wsi. Syrn.w, Wa>ihington^ D. C. 
 
 012 02T 963 
 
tTlPL^--o,sss 
 
 J 
 
 pennulip^s 
 
 pH83