Rensselaer Union, Volume 3, Number 51, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 September 1871 — The “New Departure.” [ARTICLE]

The “New Departure.”

The value or significance of the New Departure, which ihe Democracy of several of the States profess to have taken, depends upon its sincerity. How sincere are they in their acceptance of the reconstruction measures and the three amendments to the Constitution ? For example, the Ohio Democratic Convention, held June (J, resolved, as a part of their platfoim, that “Werec.gnzo ns accomplished facts the three amendments, iu fact, to t)io Constitution, recently declared adopted, and the same as no longer polk-' leal issues.” Senator Thurman, who is, by official Boaition and p*rty standing, the foremost •eurocrat in Ohio, made a speech, last week, at the State capital, which was mainly devoted to elucidating the position of liis party in regard to these amendment?, and explaining the extent to which the Democracy recognized and accepted them. He said: “Now, my friends, It has hcen comjnon forth© Republican party of this country to say that the Democrats have fakon a New Departure, add that New Departure, they allege, consists in aaying that we have boon wrong ami the Republicans haVfe her n right. I say there has never been any such confession as that. We are at much opposed to what has been done as when in nave Our cotes against it. Why, if I should see a man strike another In an uulawful and brutal manner in the Blreet, throttle him a d knock him down, and trespass upon his rights, aud I should see his wounds aud see him bleeding, 1 should be compelled to suy that he was down aud Weeding, but who would call that a Confession that tne villain slio had outraged him hid done what, was right? So when these men throttled the Constitution and ruined the peaco of the country; when they made the South n most as ruinous as in the nflijst of »var, w« remonstrated aud opposed thorq, and bow, be_causiwe cannot .deny tout they have done it; because we cat.not deny that the thing has been occ m. lished: because we are compelled to admit tho fact that the reconstruction luws have been executed and the amendments to Ihe Constitution fastened upon us, we are told, forsooth, that we admit that the Radica.e w ere right and we were wrong.” ’ !; 1 ' J If this is the extent to which the Democrats of the North have taken the New Departure, how much farther have they progressed than Jeff. Davis,iwho, on the “Oth of May last, in his Atlanta speech: said: “lam not of those who accept the situation; I accept nothing. I don't believe I did any wrong, and,, therefore, I don’t acknowledge it.” Wherein does this declaration of Davis difler in sent! ment and Idea from that of Thurman, whf> says: “We are as much opposed to what has been done as when we gave our votes against it,” meaning against the amendments? Thurman compares the reconstruction amendments to a villain’s assault upon an innocent man, who was throttled, knocked down, and savagely beaten, without cause or provocation. He says: “We Democrats are merely witnesses of the assault and outrage upon our Southern brothers. We admit, that you Radical Republicans committed it; 'but we denounce you for it, and when we obtain power we shall redress their injuries and punish you for what you have cone.” This is the extent of-the the New Departure as defined by a Presidential can didate, and the leading politician of his party, and in the State whet e it originated. How much dependence can be placed in. the profis-iona of Democratic stumpers and editors who pretend to sc’cpt the amendments-du good faith as a final and permanent settlement of the issues growing out of the rebellion ? Let these politicians., of the Thurman class come into controPbf the government, and how long will they treat the amendments as valid, binding, and final? How long will they allow the reconstruction acts to remain on the statue books? Will not they, with one accord, say, “ You fastened the reconstruction laws and tho amendments on us by force; we now have the power to repeal the former and nullify the latter, and pro-, pose to do it.”— Chmigo Tribunt .