The Mississippi Creole. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1841-1851, 1848-06-23

triotism, and the discriminating Justice of tn
American people.
"RcsotUed, That we regard this as a distinc
tive feature of our political creed, which W.
are proud to maintain before the world as the
great moral element in a form of government
springing from and upheld by the popular will
and w contrast it with the creed and practice
Of federalism, under whatever name or form.
which seeks to palsy she will of the constitu.
ent, and which conceives no imposIure toe
monstrous for the popular credulity !"
They Hput their trust in the PEOPLES inteIli.
g%ence,'' do they? Good men "put their trusto
humbly in God alone, and rest not on the
weakness of any human dependence: the
wise " put not their trust in Princes.n Now,
what manner Of men are these, who, with inn
pious and slavish adulalion, bring a reverence
to the People which is only Gods, and which
Monarchs themselves, if sober, would dis
own? Why, what are they but men who, in
stead of having that trust in "the Peoples in
telIigence'' which they profess, really confde
in the very opposite, and expect to blind the
People to all their own party-offences against
liberty and the country, to facts the openest
and the worst, merely by thus affecting an in
finite admiration for the popular judgment?
Suppose it were given against them, no matter
how decisively, Tomorrow; what would they
say? Why, just what they said in 1910, when
the popular displeasure overwhelmed them
they would say, as then, that the people
were drunk" yea, 'deluded' by 'coonskins
and log-cabins,' drunk with hard cider, the
vilcst Of Christian drinks! None reader than
these very sycophants of the People to vilify,
as soon as they can no longer deceive, them:
none prompter or more %insolent than these We
ry demagogues, when fOiled Of their arts by
the popular sense really exerted, to blaspheme
the People, whenever it refuses to let them be
its priests and and speak its %oracles.
The next member of their platform boasts
of their respect for the popular will.' Let us
see. Did they respect in 1910, when they
cried out that the people had been 'corrupted,'
that the people were 'drunkn Do they res
pect it any where, except just where they
have a majority? Let the people any where
vote against them, and they are at once, if rich,
stigmatized as 'aristocrats: > if poor, as 'drunk-
en- Is there no people, in Vermont or New
England, or New Jersey or Maryland, or North
Carolina OF Kentucky or Ohio? Will there be
none in New York, when it shall, next No-
vember vote against them? Do freemen lose
their responsibility when they cannot consent
to support for the Presidency Mr.. Polk, who
made the Mexican war, or Gen, Cass, who,
besides being a forward advocate Of all that,
wanted II f~fty-four forty war? Do freemen
lose their rights when they cannot approve all
the measures, no matter how illegal or foolish,
OF those in power? If that be so, then how is
this Government not a despotism? We (poor
'Federallsts, as the friends of Mr.. Buchanan,
Of Judge fancy, of Gov, Wall, eff Marcus
Morton, and SO many other excellent. sRepub-
licans' style us) had really thought that the
'wiD Of the people, was worthy Of a freeman's
respect, because they whose collective vote
decided that 'wilp were all, siDgly, free citi-
zens, independent, equal, sovereign, just as
much each in himself as all together. In our
simplicity, we did not know that they had no
free voice in those public matters which are
said to belong to them; we were Ignorant that
they must, under penalty Of being treated as
political outcasts, vote as the Managers of a
socalled Democratic Party. see good to order.
We were not aware that, in this boosted COM
monwealth, a party held together, as openly
declared in the Senate by an eminent man who
has reason to know them, 'by the cohesive
power of public plunder;' the party as another
high authority has more succinCtly and frank
y expressed i) of the 'spoils,' has only to put
on the empty name of Democracy and pla-
card its a5versaries as 'Federalists,' in order to
take a right the fullest and most entire to abol
ish the citizenship, the equality, the public
franchises, and the good ncme itself Of all who
are unable to think as commanded. This ex-
.clusion is effected in various ways, some Of
which we had briefly sketched for insertion
here, but van Of space excludes them. That
which is most notorious, however, is the ruth
Prescription under which all who will not
take The name Of 'Democrat,' be they never SO
devoted to the Republic, to its institutions, its
glory, and its welfare: be they never so other
wise meritorious or qualified, are, under all the
pretended forms Of freedom, stricken from the
of holding any national office or en-
.ployment, Just as much as the Jews and the
Catholic Irish were once incapacitated to hold
seats in Parliament, by laws long the shame Of
the British statute-books, but now abolished
there.
But the Wings, it is intimated in this same
candid'Platform, do not profess an equal sub
missi veness to the popular will. Well, per-
haps it is SO. But the Wings, it seems to US,
make quite as loud professions of blind sub
to the peoples wills Of PROSTATE adj
.iration for 'the peoples intelligence, honesty,
patriotism,' as men can do who respect