OPERATIONS IN KENTUCKY AND TENNESSEE. [CHAP.XII.

We can attest, sir, your religious observance of that position which Kentucky had assumed for herself. We know, sir, that when the present unhappy difficulty between the Government of the United States and the Confederate Government [arose], the State of Kentucky chose for herself a position in relation to both powers, in which her citizens fondly flattered themselves that amid the din of war, they would find peace, security to themselves and the ability to serve the suffering and afflicted of both sides.

The Government of the Confederacy acknowledged and recognized the right of Kentucky thus to act. They saw in this action only the exercise of a great right which attaches to the sovereignty of a State, and which was the principle that underlies the Government itself. The South has therefore tenaciously respected the position of Kentucky but on the other hand, this position has been repudiated by the Government of the United States from the beginning. They have repeatedly violated the neutrality of Kentucky and scoffed at those who trusted to it for protection.

It may not be improper to recall to your recollection a few of the instances in which the North have manifested its utter disregard of, and others in which it has openly and defiantly assailed, Kentucky neutrality. You will doubtless remember that when the Army was being first collected at Cairo, it was universally understood that its object and destination was down the Mississippi, to overrun Tennessee, take possession of Memphis and finally march into New Orleans. That purpose is doubtless still entertained. As a military man you know that no general would lead an army of occupation into an enemy's country and leave behind him unoccupied such a position as the map shows Columbus to be. Can any man be so blinded as to suppose that, amid a vast arrangement then being made for the military occupation of the entire South, the War Department at Washington suffered the declaration of Kentucky neutrality to interpose for one single moment a barrier to the occupancy of Columbus?

We, sir, from the first hour that Cairo became a military encampment, have felt perfectly satisfied that this place would be taken possession of by Northern troops just so soon as the objects and designs of the leaders of the war rendered it needful, and, sir, we have trembled with apprehension for the consequences to our persons our families, and our property. We had witnessed the outrages perpetrated by Northern soldierly. We had know private residences of our neighbors across the river in Missouri entered by these soldiers and despoiled the owner made prisoner or chased into the woods or the canebrake, and insult and indignity offered to unprotected and defenseless females. We knew that we stood within the danger of similar treatment, for our offense was the same. Those men had dared to exercise the freedom of opinion and of speech, and so had we; they had dared to think and express the thought that a sectional President, elected by a sectional party and administering the Government upon purely sectional ideas, was a bane and a curse to the nation. We had offended in like manner. Because they would not prove such dastards as to disavow their sentiments, this treatment was visited upon them. We, too, felt incapable of retracing our opinions thus expressed, even though punishment awaited the refractory. We knew that they did not intend to respect the neutrality of Kentucky. We knew, moreover, that in more instances than one they did openly violate it.

The case of the Columbus Rangers is in point. You, sir, may perhaps not have heard the particulars of that case. Captain M.H. Wright,