Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1845-06-06

be synonymous with amaIgamalob.
Now. is il no, most strange that the Times, u
aiming It's blows Al the ''ierce Democracy OF Tux
North, should have singled out TWO men Of {"
o'rn Wing party for is peculiar cast'sanon =
The Editor OF The Tribune we all Know 10 Nc
wild and visionary fanatic on this ana olher Suo
jecis, and Mr.. S. p. Chase is far from Deiis
Democrat. Indeed, some years ago, when II
Cincinnati, We we're distinctly informed, thai D.
was an active member Of the Wing party. IL
denouncins, therefore, the n. u Tribune and Mr
Chase, the Abolilionist orator and The honore'
recipien, OF negro argesses, lei mol Inc democrat
ic party suffer any Of the odium which Justly d.
taches To these Two fanatics Because MIR. Chase
a Wing, chooses, in support OF his amaigama
ton doctrines. 10 assert that "tIue Democracy
makes no enquiry about the color OF me sh'h'
does ii follow that he speaks, as an authorized or
gan, the sentiments Of the Democratic parry =
Ohio? The Times has done well in assaiiil's 'n'
dangerous doctrines Of these two Whlss--nut
has egresiously erred in deducins theTeirom any
ground for attack upon The principles oil lhe pe
mocralic party.
Let us now examine those principles, ami sho"
how abhouen, they are, from their nature, 10 any
thing like The fanatic spirit Of Abolilionism.
The Grand distinction between the Democratic
AMI Wing parties is, that the former are bouho
by the terms OF a Constitution as il is wrItten.-
They see in it no power 10 charter Naiioha
Bank, 10 impose heavy and oppressive burIhens,
10 raise an immense public revenue, and then '
waste il by exrravagant and unequal distrIbu'
lions, either in the shape of largesses or national
internal improvements 10 the States. The
Democratic party insist upon strict conslrnc.
lion Of the powers granted 10 The Federal head
reserving all the rest 10 The States in their equal
and separate sovereignty. The compromises on
The subjec, OF the domestic institutions oil The
States, are regarded by them with reverence, as
essential TO The rights of the States and the safely
of the Union
Tie Wing party, on the other hand, seem 10
have no guide Tor their actions but the dangerous
general welfare clause. So far from strictly
constituting the Constitution as il is written they
make il practice 10 be bound by no such mar
row rules. Ia its language they see plain
Is written a POWER TO charter a Bank, 10
enact high Tariff, 10 establish system
oil Internal Improvements and distribution OF
the public revenue Their wild hcresies may
be traced 10 one grand idea, viz: that our Go
vernment IS national in which individuals and
not States are the consli,uents-while the De-
mocrats regard i, as Federalive, in which States
and no, individuals are lis constituents. From
this fruitful source have sprung all the Federal
notions, which, stripping The sovereign States OF
their high powers, would load the Federal head
with vast and dangerous authority. To This
fountain may be traced those mighty invasions
Of the Constitution, in The shape OF mammoth
Banks, high Tariffs, extensive Internal I'm
pruvemenls, which, il persisted in, would Tevo-
ulionize our whole system as left 10 us b. our
fathers, and convert il inlo The wors, species Of
consolidated government. INV, is il not natural
that the party which daily cnacts these violations
OF Inc Constitution, shonld in lis wild ard arbi-
irary construction, be led 10 forget the sacred
ern portion ii a Least, consider il a fair de-
duclon VI The general welfare" clause, ha, they
should interfere with the domestic institutions Of
the States The Democrats look upon every
State as sovereign and distinct, and their doctrine
IS Glands OF" Tie Wings, from their theory
as well as their practice, lool; upon the Federal
head as a national Government, and would, con-
sislenlly with their principles, stretch its arm
them vassals TO the central authority. We con-
slider il clear, therefore, that the principles Of The
Democratic party are much less favorable than
those OF The Wings . the growth Of abolition
doctrines.
But The Times takes The opposite view and
makes the following strange appeal 10 the South.
ern Democrats:
1--WE have been induced 10 make The foregoing
remarks in no spirit q bitterness against the
Southern Democratic Party We, Of course, do
moi brand them with The open encouragement Of
doctrines, which they abfor as much as we do
BIT wc do mean 10 ram hcm ~ thar cooperation
riM Northern portL, ci0S pr'nrVI,s ic0d d.
rcciiu Ia mr. results ,rhici Southern Haics ami
Democrats Nniic IN condening. We do mean 10
say, that they are bound, in political brotherhood,
10 party wbosc princIpfS are Tic teri Of N0r!h6rn
fanatics. We appeal 10 t1cm AS they revere our
laws, and fear the destruction OF Southern rights,
10 lend no further counicnGatc 10 The G.rariaa por-
tOn Of their pnriy.'
What has been The paclcc of the Two parties
a, The North Look al the Texas question. Did
not the whole Wing Parry at the Month oppose it,
merely on The ground OF slavery? Did not John
Quincy Adams, and eleven ether Wing Abolition
members OF Congress dcclaie, thai annexation
would induce and would Justify, dissolution OF
the Union? Did not Webster, Seward, &c, un.
blnshingly appeal 10 The Aboli'ionsIs to oppose
Mr.. Polk, because Of his Texas slavery views
Did not the Wings denouncc the Abolilionsis
0jicr The November Election, not because they
voted for Mr. Polk, but because they did noi vote
for Mr.. Clay, as they had been implored 10 do
and as they had been expected 10 do 1t is fal
from agreeable 10 us TO rip up The scenes that have
passed, bu ii is necessary, in orderlo do justice &c
The motives and the actions OF the Democratic
Party.
Only the other day, writer in the Boston
Courier the leading Wing paper Of Massachu-
SETS made proposition Il the Wing Party to
adopt at once and distinctly, the Abolition creed
and 10 make it part and parcel of The Wing or.
sanizaion. He says that b. holds il 10 be "a tact
of which there can be no reasonable doHbt, that I'M
less the Wig PARTY will uke ground that A bo
liiioniS,s can consistently oc,npy, hfy cannot sue
coed" 1t is true thai the United States Gazette
also Wing, warmly opposes The proposition, bu'
ii mainly rests lis objection upon The impolicy OF
the movement Although recognizes "among
The Wings Of The Middle and Eastern States a
rna mann who are openly hostile 10 the lns''lu'
lions of slavery yet it does not consider This
fact as necessarily making the Wing Party Aboli
iionias or an Abolition Party; and contends, that
il would be al once 10 cut of, or drive away, al
mos, every Wing residing South OF Mason and
Diyon's line. and would deprive the Wings of The
votes OF Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina
Tennessee K.ntuckv and Louisiana, usually