The North-Carolina standard., 1850-05-01
For the North Carolina Standard
The Washington +" Republic.''

9ence OF tne Northern leaning OF the Republic, we
beg leave to refer back little to article published
in that paper time since to which we felt some
inclination to refer at the time of its first appearance,
but was restrained from doing because preferred
waiting for farther developments of the policy of the
Administration upon the subject. The article to which
of Northern and Southern actions and in ii the most
cunning sophistry is used to pursuade its Southern
friends that the great of the Whig party North
are mild-thinkers upon the subject of Slavery
statement noto!ous at variance with the facts Of the
case. The article is introduced with elaborate
prelude, quite ingeniously framed, upon the 26th rule
of the House of Representatives, in order that the
common reader might understand the precise manner
in which Congress proceeded to dispose of Resolu-
tons. After going on to explain at some length, the
article states that if the main question is ordered
be put the matter is brought at to an issue, and
the members, without the slightest chance for amend
ment or explanation, obliged to say yea or nay
to the proposition. This is what is familiarly called
gaggng resolution through the House, and, adds
the Editors, sit is geous violation of the right
of free debate" Marksyou, it is abolition Reso-
luton that the article is about noticing, and hear the
Editors they assert that it is gagging resolution
through the to bring it to direct vote with
out wasting the time of the members of Congress to
wait for amendments, in order that we may have the
peculiar phaseology of each Northern fanatic the
subject And further, it 6 is outrageous violation
of the right of free debate' refuse the Northern
injury, the privilege Of drawing eight dollars per day
out of the public Treasury, to make public denunci-
alton of our institutions with which their Legislative
duties are in way connected. The article proceeds
with the assertion that in this manner, Mr. Giddngs
and those who act with him, have been enabled,
with Democratic aid, Ga word that shall notice
specially in its pace,) and from the South too, to
get during the last few years, vote on many prop
ositions exceedingly offensive to the good people of
that secton," &c. 1t is obviously easily seen from
this quotation, that the Editors would nsinuate,
they subsequently assert, that if Resolutions were
allowed to 90 for amendment and debate, there
| would be no more of them-a thing that would in
effect destroy the object of Resolutions For if Res
ouons not acted upon where is the necessity of
introducing them! Now we submit to your consid-
Grafton, If it is not evident that of the Res
outons, if introduced, compelled in the very
ture of things to be acted upon, even though they all
be suffered to go on to the calendar" since it is
fact that there is Representative from almost
every Northern State, ever ready to urge these Reso
lutions on the consideration of Congress. This we
think quite evident from the history of the past even
of the memorable OCCASION referred to in the article
under consideration, the history of which proves that
the Northern Wings in body, yield their support to
these Resolutions, however offensive to the South the
language in which they are couched may be. They
care not the lowest abuse is quite acceptable, as they
proclaimed when they rallied to the support of Colts
celebrated Preamble and Resolutions-the 's memora-
BILE OCCASION referred to by the Republic. Thus
far, think it conclusive that the article in question
has established beyond doubt, that the Editors of
the Republic are in favor of not only agitation upon
the subject of these Resolutions, but we think they
have shown pretty clearly disposition to encourage
the Northern sgators in introducing and wasting the
time of the House in these injurious discussions.
We propose now to notice the object of the Editors
in penning the article before u.s. which was nothing
more nor less than to injure certain Southern Repre-
sentatives, whose influence they feared would prove
quite destructive to the Taylor Administration. And
in order that we may not be obscure on this point,
will notice here that the Editors after having gone
through their explanation, proceed to eulogize Mr..
Vinton of Ohio, and other Wing leaders at the North
for their mdness towards Southern rights, and more
than intimate that this gentleman together with 9TH
er Northern Whig leaders, was opposed to the pre-
vous question OH Colts Resolution, because he wish
ed the Resolution to get to the calendar in Of
der that it might there perish in parturition -an
event that would have been the natural and certain
consequence according to the assertion of the Editors
Now it happened that Mr.. HARRISON, while this
Resolution under consideration, moved to lay 1t
the table, which failed by vote of 81 to IS. Here
direct proposition to get rid of the offensive
Preamble as we'll as the Resolution, and we submit
it to the impartial judgment Of any intelligent man,
if Mr. Vinton and other patriotic Whig leaders at the
North had wished to get this Resolution on to the
calendar for the purpose of destroying it Gin partu-
rition,' would they not have voted with the 81, in
cluding Venable, Meade, and others whom the Re-
public endeavors injure for laying the proposition
the table! Is not the affirmative of this question
selfevdent AS they did not vote tor laying this
for retaining the proposition, it not evident that they
disagree with that part of the article of the Republic
which says, that if proposition of the kind gets on
to the calendar, it is never heard of again.?
The Editors next proceed, after having as they
supposed sufficiently prepared the minds of their read
ers, to expose Mr.. Venable, Meade. and others as
agitators, for the very simple reason that they voted
with Giddings and Co. to sustain the previous ques-
tion and dispose of the question without wasting the
public money in speechmakng upon subject that 1t
was BEST they thought, to dispose of without fur
ther debate since the views of each were sufficiently
known and at the same time they laud MIR. Vinton
for voting against the previous question: matter that
was in effect Of but little consequence in our opn-
ion in as much as it involved nothing nor less
than simply, shall the proposition be retained before
the House for fruitess discussion, or shall 1t be
brought direct issue in order that both parties may
have the chance of showing their sentiments by
direct vote! In this vote, we think, from what has
already been shown, there was expression OF opn-
ion either for or against the proposition 1t was sim
ply vote for determining the manner of disposing
of the Resolution. 1t then certainly no dspar-
agement to Mr.. Venable, any other gentleman, to
vote with GiddDgs or any body else, in determining
the manner in which they should upon the Reso-
luton especially when they chose that mode in which
there would be- less time spent in it's consideration,
as we'll as less agitation upon the subject, since We
have seen that the mode they adopted was simply to
avoid long and irritating debate. Bnt how is the
case with those peculiarly mild thinkers and nonag-
itatorsthe glorious Wing leaders Of the North who
voted with Giddings, not only to refuse to lay the
propestiono the table, but also in vavor OF the d.
rect proposition! If this presents Mr. viaton and
the Northern Wing leaders in the attitude OF noa,ag
itators, we confess cannot what they coad 90
to make them agitators, since we have shown con-
clusivey that they not only in favor OF the most
prolonged manner OF proceeding with the Resolution,