The State guard., 1848-07-04

ples, with a neu pldiform2 Why thi sudden yielding of tho ancient, well-tried and-proved-to- sufficient doctrine of tn, South, and of the whole party, both Nortl and South Is the constitution less safe has it's protecting virtues and never-belore doubted principles grown less eflicacious that our fellow citizens may not carry witt them, the provisions it contains alike fol the protection of all Amencan citizens even to the distant regions of the latel, acquired Mexican territories Or ha: the majority in Congress grown more honest that we can better trust them now than ever before, with those tender q had almost said sacred) interests of the Southl No! We mM not, we dare not trust them. It is all they could wish or ask for. It is nothing but sthe principles of the Wilmot Proriso re-announced, but with a very different object, I admit. The Pro- viso asserts the power of Congress, to de- clare by its acts, that slavery shall not ex. ist in a given territory. This new doc Urine, attempted to be established in the South, asserts the power of Congress, and calls upon it to exercise that power, to the extent of not only declaring that we shall be allowed to take with us our slaves into that territory, but that Congress must pro- tect US too, while there, against what might be the prejudices of the people, in whose midst we would find ourselves. And has it come to this, that before man. kind, and in the very face of the enemy we acknowldge the 'short comings' and insufficency of that glorious old constitu- tion,' and of which our orators, poets, and statesmen, have been boasting as 'Heav- en's last, best gift to man
 No! it is neither insufficient, nor has the majority in Congress grown more trustworthy. We shall continue to rely upon it as our sheet anchor, our political sureity, wherever it may please Provi- denee to cast our lot, within this wide, ex- tended domain. It was matie for uie pro- lection of minorities.
 But it is said the Barnburners of New York have asserted the doctrine that ''the Municipal laws of the Mexican territories would not be changed in the ceded territo- ", by the cession to the United States and that therefore it is necessary 10 assert this newly discovered power of Congress, and to obtain its aid. Well, what if they do hold to that doctrine? Does that make it sound Does the fact that they enter tain abominable heresies, make what we once held to be false now good doctrine ?
 So they hold too that the principles o' the Wilmot Proviso are correct, and other fanatics, abolitionists, "ct id omne genus, , say that Congress has the power of abol' ishing slavery in the States. Both O which doctrines l conceive to be more alarming than that claimed by the Barn
 burners. in relation to the Municipal laws of the territories 10 be acquired. And ye we trusted, never doubling the sufliciency of the Constitution. l say more alarm
 ing, because provisoism and abolitionsn
 look to Congressional action and Execu
 tive sanction, and is thus made a politica
 question, and upon which points we mus
 have sound Presidents: and because the latter (that in relation to the Municpa
 laws of the Mexican territories) can witt
 no propriety or necessity be made polit
 ical question, it neither requiring Con
 gressional action nor the Presidents sane
 ton, being purely q legal question, ant
 one over which the Courts are the onl,
 tribunals competent to take jurisdiction.
 am one then, who much prefers t'
 stand by the old Platform. It would b'
 risking too much with those reckless, an'
 I fear, too often corrupt majorities in Con
 gress. apprehend that they would sool
 show us that the right to ertend, also in robbed and carried with it the right to re
 strict slavery, and having once given u our safe position upon the Constitution, ol this subject, we never could regain it with
 out forfeiture ot our own self.respec, and the respect of our opponents, both C ,, which we now have, and ,deSeruedly too, trust.
 But can we and ought we to suppor
 Gen. Cass! l have shown what ha heretofore been the doctrine of the Soutf and attempted to prove that it is the prop CT ground for us yet to occupy, and espe cially for the reason that to adopt the DO sition assumed by Mir. Yancey and som few others, would be to surrender oul selves, bound hand and foot, to the 'tende , mercies" of tyranical majority of Con gress: that epon the principles of tn < Wilmot Proviso, or kindred projects, ou ) main effort has been to have sound Pres : dents, and to keep Congress aloof, sayin
 to them, "hands off; no interference, it . our business, and ours alone, and with tn help of Heaven we will stand by tn y Constitution. We ask no more than wht '- n guaranties to us"
 n Mir. Yancey precludes the necessity r. proving that Gen. Cass is sound on tn $ Wilmot Proviso. He admitted it repea IS edly in his speech on the l7th ult--h admitted it in his remarks upon his mino le ity report in the Baltimore Conventions e In his answer to delegate from Pennsy 10 vania, who desired to know in what Il ,r views of Gen. Cass differed from the re !. olutions reported by the minority, he sa ol -"I will answer the delegate from Pcnl te sylvania. Gen. Cass, understand, hol r. that while Congress cannot interfere aoi a. slarery in the States or Territories, the i
 habitants of a territory, while yet under m territorial government. may make su,