The State guard., 1848-07-04
MR. HARDY:

olOu itoii tiAS tOihoCioNJ VT e'O ONe'NS PN'A the matter, and see that good many of the press, as we'll as meetings of the peo pie, are volunteering some expressions of their views, in a manner not very flatter ing or complimentary to that distinguished gentleman.
 I am afraid that in this merely personal matter, we are likely to loose sight ot the real question at hand, and that, too, the most momentus a free people can ever be called upon to decide. It is, as humbly conceive, Who shall be our next Presi- dent? Shall it be general Cass or Gen. Taylor? From the publicly proclaimed opinions of those two distinguished citi- zens, which of them do we find it will be most in conformity with our principles and our interests to supports take for gran ted it is not Gen. Taylor, because, in no published principle of his, upon point involving the political differences of the two great parties of this country, is he mah US; because his letter to Capt. AL lson is the only published effort of his to define his political creed; and that was virtually repudiatcd by the Coarention that nominated him, when MT. Hilliard, of this State, was constrained to withdraw his motion recognizing the correctness of the principles therein promulgated; because ,cih him as President, "Coagress is 10 Dc the Gorernment." And for authority on this point, refer to the language itself oI the Nem York Express, now a Taylor pa paper, where it says-"As Congress- is tC Dc he Gopernmem under Gen. Taylor, tt secure that Congress aH our egorts must bt bent" And then, finally, because, if the Express be correct, (and who can better expound the views of candidate than inc political supporters of that candidatc!, and if Congress passes the Wilmot Pro- viso, or any other Prouiso, striking at the dearest interests of the South, it is to Dc the law. "Congress is 10 De THE Gop.
 crnment." But no more in this direction
 If then, we cannot support Gen. Tay.
 Tor, can we support Gen. Cass?
 Gen. Cass, for neatly half century
 has been prominently before the Ameri
 can people as one of tleir leading states
 men, and, consequently upon all the ques
 tions that have hitherto divided the two
 great parties of this country, his views art
 well known, and fully coincide with tho
 principles of the democratic party botl
 North and South.
 But his views upon the Wilmot Proviso
 do they coincide with inc views of tn,
 people of the slavehohing Statesl 1
 they do, then is our bounden duty to vot'
 for him. Let us sec
 understand that the doctrine of tn,
 South, so far as the right or power of Con
 gress to interfere in the question of sla
 very in the States or Territories is con
 cerned, has always been of neutrality
 of non-interterence. l may but point t
 the resolutions and addresses of publi meetings of the people. all over the South to the speeches of our members of Con
 gross, (including that of the Hon. Judg
 Dargan, of this State, in January, ls47, and the resolutions adopted by their Leg , islature, to prove this.
 , The celebrated resolution of the Vii ginia Legislature, and which gave tn tone to all those adopted subsequently, b meetings of the South, and even "appr' printed" by the meeting at Charleston, 0
 the 9th of March of last year, when M Calhoun took occasion to give his view
 at large upon the Wilmot Proviso, reat z as follows
 ' "Be a ordained unanimously, by L 5 General Assembly of Virginia, That Il s Government of the United States has l. control, directly or indirectly, mediately d immediately, over the institution of sl V very, and that in taking any such contr ; it transcends the limits of its legitima ,' functions, by destroying the internal 0 Il ganization of the sovereignties who ere y ted them."
 This contains what conceive to be t h doctrine of the South-and of the Dem ,r cratic party North and South.-iti is in su ,o stance identical with the serenth resol |. tion. which. tor the third time, has be- :, re-adopted by the party in a Nation N Convention, assembled at Baltimore-a !. which has never before been objected ly as insufficient, even by our opponents le upon which in 1s40 and ls44 we we
 into the Presidential canvass, and up
 which we have carried and successful r. maintained our ascendency in almost lg entire slaveholding States. That reso n. ton, then, has become venerable for l., years, and associated in our memori y y with the triumphs and the glories of | ~ past. No wonder, then, that the Conve Tn tion declined to add to or take from IS beautiful completeness. And none mo d than MT. Yancey has taught us to belle B. in its entire sufficiency, asthe eloquent ( r.. itorials of the 'sCrisis" will abundantly ,d test. But need not stop longer, a = show, from variety of sources, that SUI T. has been the doctrine of the South. VI And why go now to other and untri ,. doctrines Why this late effort to interp