Mobile daily commercial register and patriot., 1841-07-21
ONE OF TIE PEOPLE
For Me Rsgif7


"Make me a colonist, not of England, (ior that would be going from the frying pan into the ire) but if you please, of Spain, France, or Holland, rather than compel me to be permanent resident of South Carolina, ,onh the pomg he part of an Aaierican Congress 10 iesisiae, directly indirectly he sub- ject 0f Siou9y."- Crisis Mo- 30, D. l4S. Thus spoke true son of the south ;--one whose prophetic fears for the destiny of the southern states, will yet be consummaed by realities appalling than the imagination can bear to contemplate. And such should be the responsive echo o every southern bosom, whose habitalion and affections not bound in fealty to the north of Mason and DiXon's line. ltis peculiarly unol therefore, this june tare, to find the misguided and malicious designs of the abolitionsts, forwarded eff sstered) af oar o0n residey; and more particularly so, that repre- sentative from Virginia should be the man, who from mistaken ideas of berality, and profound disre- gard for constitutional rights, holds out a hand to sustain the wretched fanatics, while they apply the torch to our very aliars.
 Still more alarming has it become, when these ef- forts published, and auded, and seconded by the press, the exponent (hat ought to be of public sen timent-that mighty engine for good for evil, ac- cording to its good or wicked ntent-but too often (hopelessly for the purity of our inslutons) that ''mighty instrument of little men" who, to use the words of Mr. Peasants, 'sconsult personal popuar- ty first and their country's good afterwards"
 With such elements existing within own soil, it requires apology from any individual, ho Kever humble, who attempts to tear away the fmsy veil of patriotism with which these eudo-liberalsts attempt to conceal their real seninent-. Every bound to sound the alarm, whenever the foe enters the terri tsry which he is appointed to defend, or whenever one of its own soldiers attempts to desert. With thIs belief l proceed to examine what the Advertiser considers be, ''the unanswerable arg- ments" of the Hon. John AI Bolts.
 In the frstplace then Mir. Bolts sets out with the | admission that "Congress has no jurisdiction, no constitutional control the subject of slavery even in the District of Columbia" This at once should supercede all necessity for the task undertake, but throughout his letter, these admissions of unobec- tionable doctrines are ngenousy intertwned with the poisonous principles, that he who careless applies them, will share the fate of the unfortunate victims who thought they wore garland of perfumes, while beneath it there lmked the seeds of certain death.
 And see how he effects it-by following up this Keystone To constitutional security, with the qua- flying sayo, but this of itself is de5atea6e ground ' Debateable ground forsooth Call ihe plain, nris- gused rights reserved the states respectively, by written article of agreement, by te vaor and sealed by the blood of our fathers for the constu ton is but the offspring oi our noependence) debate able Why the most loud mouthed consoalionists would not have ventured such an absurdtv. The most zeaious of their ranks, who, in claiming that the constitution Sis not compact of the stntes, but a frame of government made by the people," that ''the states as such parties to IL" even he, centralizng he is tells you another place, ''the holding of slaves Is domestic concern, with which other States ough not to interye and as long as il is permitted in any of the States (meaning by their own w the peace of the country requires thai hen nghS of the masters should De respected. Wnhom Il the South- ern States ,ooud probably hare t6nseaied Co The union. ."-lByard's Exposition.
 And yet Mr. Bolts considers this question ''debae- able ground" :"-Can the rights of the master e Gre spected'' when petitions avowedly destructive to these rights are offered 10 the body of men who, if in no other light, as honest men are bonnd to see tlat the treaty of union is preserved involate and if the South would not have consented to the union under other circumstances, IS It n0W to 'debate" whether the alternative was wisely or unwisely accepted? Was it thrust into our national compact unseen and uninspected! ordd it run through the crucbe of the most rigid and untiring contest! For in those days also, there advocates for and against the state sovereignty. "The constitution" said Mir. Williams, 'shoud be termed mol 10 Sioaiiow up the Siafe gou9nments: The general government ought to be confined to certain national objects, aud ihe States shoutd retain such potcers ter internal poiics."-[Elliott's Debates, vol. p. PIT.
 Alexander Hamilton, the head and from of the ultra consoldationists, said-''Tne regulation complain ed of was result of the spirit of accommodation which governed the convention, and i0fhom tns in- duigeace, unon could poSSibly haue Jeen foSned [Ibidp. PIP.
 Notwithstanding, in the teeth of these admissions from their own armory, il is told us no,c. that the control of Congress over the subject of slavery, is "debateable ground.'
 And by what parallel of reasoning does Mir. Bolts attempt to prove it sol Why by the yeriest sophism that could disgrace tyro By lamenling the many topics concerning which differences of opinion are likely to arise and become legitimate grounds for pe- fifion and naming parallel instances s'national bank" and the ''tariff." Mir. Boits surely intended one of two things when he denied ths-he desired either to insult the understanding of his readers or render himself ridiculous. The last we cannot suppose, however we'll he may have succeeded-and if the first, those ~ho endorse he responsibility irifh him.
 These subjects, the bank and tarf, aie not specified