sets hostile foot upon the actual soil of the
Commonwealth. In other words, the Legislature, according to the manifest
will of the people, should declare the neutrality of Kentucky in this
unnatural and accursed war of brothers, and equip the State for the
successful maintenance of her position at all hazards?"

It is well known that loyalty means unqualified, unconditional, eternal
devotion and adherence to the Union, with a prompt and decorous
acquiescence in the will and action of the Administration. Although a
definition of the term has been frequently asked, and many have affected
not to understand it, it is positively settled that every man is a
traitor who doubts that this definition is the correct one. It is
impossible, then, to avoid the conviction that in the year 1861, there
was really no loyalty in the State of Kentucky. A good deal was
subsequently contracted for, and a superior article was furnished the
Government a few months later.

Had their been during the winter and spring of 1861, a resolute and
definite purpose upon the part of the Southern men of Kentucky, to take
the State out of the Union; had those men adopted, organized and
determined action, at any time previously to the adjournment of the
Legislature, on the 24th of April, the Union party of Kentucky would
have proven no material obstacle.

The difficulty which was felt to be insuperable by all who approved the
secession of Kentucky, was her isolated position. Not only did the long
hesitation of Virginia and Tennessee effectually abate the ardor and
resolution of the Kentuckians who desired to unite their State to the
Southern Confederacy, but while it lasted it was an insurmountable,
physical barrier in the way of such an undertaking. With those States
antagonistic to the Southern movement, it would have been madness for
Kentucky to have attempted to join it. When at length, Virginia and
Tennessee passed their ordinances of secession, Kentucky had become
infatuated with the policy of "neutrality." With the leaders of the
Union party, it had already been determined upon as part of their system
for the "education" of the people. The Secessionists, who were without
organization and leaders, regarded it as something infinitely better
than unconditional obedience to the orders and coercive policy of the
Federal Government; and the large class of the timid and irresolute of
men, who are by nature "neutral" in times of trouble and danger,
accep