Washington telegraph., 1850-05-08
The "Banner" of the 30th ult. has truly

The "Ranner" of the 30th ult has truly |
mi; osreaed US as TO one of the very plain
,nestious we propounded in Or paper OF
he 24,h, but to the other it has not even
,eicnea reply. We asked to be enlight- |
med as to what were the views of the
Wing patty upon the Southern question,
and TO be informed whether the letter at
toobad y Mr.. Johnson's communication
to She "lnteligencer," was a taar 'ef7er
of ,be views Of the Democratic party IN
this State.
To tne FIRST question the Banner re-
plies, tat "the Wing party throughout
the United States, as well as i'll this State
areoprosed TO any action by the people
If he South, which will serve to weaken
Nrthern Wing influence and arrest
Northern aggression" We cannot divine
w. once the aBanner" derives its infnrina-
tio, but it certainly advances an idea
ne ler dreamed of in our philosophy, ana
alpcether incompatible with the position
of many Southern Wings Oh this question
WI regard the present unfortunate Sec
tioaal division as being fraught with eVli
to the country, and believe that it is the
duty of every patriot to sustain those who
are endeavoring to heal it, and not by
fa:tious opposition, add fuel to the flames.
The Banner" is in error in its state
ment of the grounds upon which it al
lodges the Wing press of this State oppose
the meeting of the Nashville convention.
We oppose it, because it originated with,
and is approved and advocated by many
who boldly avow their object to be dis
Of the Union. We oppose it
because there has been no overt act of
aggression against Southern interest to
render Southern convention necessary.
We oppose it, because we believe the
rights of the South can and will be main-
tanned under the constitution, and because
We believe it would have tendency to
injure the cause of the South, by driving
from her support through premature
action and wholesale denunciation, the
portion of the North, whose
votes and influence have shown their de-
votion to the constitution, and under it to
Southern rights. These are some of the
reasons why we oppose Southern con-
vention, and not as the "Banner'' has it,,
because we fear "to weaken Northern
Whig influence, and arrest Northern ag-
gresslon.' Will the Banner state the
ground of It's support?
The appalling cry Of disunion to which
the Banner so strenuously objects is
raised only when it is threatened, and cir
cumstances warrant it. When men
boldly avow their object to be disunion,
Or estimate the value of The Union 10y
dollars and cents, and by figures attempt
to show the advantages the South would
derive from dissolution, it affords in our
humble opinion sufficient grounds for sus-
picioning them OF harboring the idea, if
they do not express it.
The Banner illustration from a
short conversation with leading whig,
S no evidence of the views of the Wing
party We held similar conversation
with an influential Democrat short time
since, who avowed himself a dsunionist,
md in favor of an immediate dissolution;
,ut we would not from this fact attempt
o charge the party with being disun-
onists, although it would only he carrying
,ut the "Banner's' argument. We know
hat a majority of at least two-tlirds Of the
Democrats within the limits of our ac-
luaintance are not only opposed to a
dissolution of the Union, but strenu-
,usly opposed TO the views shadowed
orth in Mr. Johnson's address, as is the
Wing press Of this State The views OF
my one man, or set Of men cannot be
aiken as the views of either party. 1t is
question above party; aquestion involv-
NC the very existence of our Government;
question which, we trust, will shortly
'e finally and satisfactorily adjusted--not
~ Nashville convention, but by the
patriotic devotion of leading members OF
10Th political parties now in Congress.
SIR JOHN tRANKLIN.-Sir Geo. Simpson,
he governor of the Hudson Bay Compa-
~, has written a letter, in which he says
here is no foundation for the reports OF
he ascertained safety of Sir John Frank