Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1849-07-12

and swindlers," and any law for their protection from
the grip of avarice as sc corrupt and vicious" We
certainly do stand forth the avowed advocate and de-
fender Of the law a~bolshing Imprisonment for debt,
as well as all other laws calculated to place our fell
low-men in possession of their natural and inalien-
able rights, and if the Journal and the wings choose
to regard it as I" corrupt and vicious they are at
perfect liberty to do so.
AS TO the rascally misquotation from our article
about " Matson's not being a good citizen, " our read
ers very well know that we said no such thing.
GTThe following paragraph from the Washington
Union of the 29th ult. is significant. We copy il, be-
cause we may have been slightly impressed as the
Albany Atlas appears to have been. All we ask of
the Union is, to give US Of the Free States, fair play
on the slavery question, and not to commit US 10 posi-
tions which we nre confident u large majority of the
people will not sustain. The Augusta (Maine) Age
talks sensibly upon this subject. The Union says
"The Albany Atlas appears 10 regard our publication of
Gen. Foote'S letter, in reply 10 Col. BentOn's speech (all the
general and argumentaIive portions of which, leaving out as
much as we could Of that which was personal, We ~published)
as a breach OF our position OF non-interyention. We do not so
regard il. We feel bound TO give all sides in the controversy,
taking part with none. We took that course with those two
documents, forbearing to express an opinion in favor of one
or the other. Does the Atlas call that injustice, or a viola
ton of our pledge of non-interveniion ? We cannot so re-
kdu IT. II W. give OuC Nic lu auIo lOlAu utIONtISy
we consider we are also bound TO let the other side be heard
and such, we believe, will be the view Of every just and
Col. Benton, nor for those of Gen. Fooie, published in their
own names and on their own responsibilities. And we are
surprised that any journal desiIing the harmony Of the dem
ocraiic party would presume to charge us with violating our
principle Of non-intervenion, when we have taken a course
SO impartial, and, in our view, so unexceptiOnabIe."
By the wny. as we have alluded to this subject,
perhaps it will not be entirely out of place to copy
the following recent article from the National Era,
the Free Soil paper at Washington. We think the
conclusion Of the Era rather favorable to the propriety
of the position taken by the Union, as a measure of
party policy. We hope it will prove to be n correct
conclusion. if we have a right to expect nothing bet
ter. We have always had great confidence in the
wisdom and ability of Mr.. Burke, and nothing would
pain us more than that any circumstance should i'm
pair that confidence. The Era talks thus:
"NcN-INrERvENrIoS" MIR. Burke Northern man, citi-
zen Of a State committed by the State Conventions Of all its
political parties TO the support OF the Wilmot Proviso, having
become associate editor of the Washington Union, and that
paper having claimed to be " the sole organ at The seat Of
that both editors should issue a declaration of principles con-
corning the only question on which a difference Of opinion
exists in the party.
nice distractions must have perplexed the two respectable
gentiemen-how carefully all The subtleties Of definition and
language must have been studied-what cutting, and pairing,
and chiseiling, were required. before the platform could be
reared on which North aud South were to meet together, New
Hampshire and Virginia embrace each other. But, Whatever
caution may have been observed in the declaration Of prin-
ciples. il was given to the public in language clear, intelli-
gibIe and precise.
They aver that the ground they take on the whole ques-
ton 81 is that Of Non-htersntiOn." On the subject of the
abolition Of slavery in the States, the justice and constiiu-
tionaliy of this ground. they assume TO be conceded even by
the great majority OF the American People IN all sections Of
the country.
In reference to slavery in the District of Columbia, they
contend for Non-Laferrention, unless slavery be first abol-
ished in the States Of Virginia and Maryland, and its abOli-
ton demanded by the people OF the District, " Uho are d-
recffy Interested"
Concerning the slave trade in the District, they say MOTH
ing-and we therefore infer, their declaration purporting to
be a full exposition Of their joint creed upon the question of
slavery, that they do not hold 10 the principle of N0n-Iater-
rentioR as it regards that traffic.
With regard to slavery in the Territories, they stand upon
the Non-IaferuesffOn ground by which we mean say
they. " that Congress shall abstain from all legislation in
relation TO the subject Of siaDery in the neD Territories;
Lariag 1t to the people Of hs Territories Themselves to make
Union, and to regulate their concerns in their oDa ,cdy ("
The italicising is theirs.
This means nothing at all. or is a plain recognition Of
the right Of the people OF California and New Mexico 10 ex-
ciude slavery from their boundaries. J~ndisposed to suspect
these gentlemen Of mystifcation. we shall take it for grant
ed that this recognition was precisely what they meant. The
Union therefore differs from MI Calhoun, and the slavery
agitators Of the South, who deny any such right in the peo-
pie of a Territory, more hercely even than they deny a SINH
lar right TO Congress.
II is not our intention now to combat any Of these posi-
tions OF the Union, but We present q summary Of them. and
call attention To them, so that il may be seen how Ingenious
Nv North and South have hitched their horses together. OF
course, the respectable editors do not suppose that their
ground Of Non-iateruenffon, in relation to slavery in the
District and in the Tcnit 'ries, will he adopted by either sec
tior Of the Democratic party, but II IL the only one which a
Northern and Southern man could work together In one
newspaper concern, and the only one which a journal aspi-
ring to be sole central organ Of the Northern and SostheIn
Democracy could take, with The least possible offence TO
either sec ion, aud with any prospect Of securing a fair share
Of support from both.
OF course, the good people will proceed TO discuss and
finally settle these matters In their own way, without any
particular reference to the convenience or interest Of any of
the numerous organs at the scat of Government"
OF Gen John A.. Quitman is the democratic nom-