Weekly national intelligencer., 1850-03-16

ground in their ayerments, the essential part of
which Contained in the second resouton) none but
political fanatics (and hardly they would be found
to dspute-faintly outline the purpose of which
late discussions in and out of Congress hardly
leave doubt, through the instrumentality of
the proposed Convention to unsettle the founda-
tions of the Government of the United States.
They set out, indeed, with protesting devoted and
cherished attachment to the Unions but they beg
the question of aggression by the non-slaveholdng
States, in order to suggest the idea that they he
People of Mississippi desire to have it only such
as they "desire'' it, These Resolutions do not
limit the scope of the Convention to the boundaries
of the Constitution, nor do they ayow the obliga-
ton to keep within the Union-which forms
so distinct feature of the Hartford Convention
or the intention to advance the general welfare.
All their views and all their objects relate to sec
ionai aims and sectional interests to the interests
of the saveholding States, without appearing to
care in the least for the interests, rights, claims
of the remaining States Of the Union. This Missis-
sippi Convention acts under the influence of excited
feeling, and having nothing to propose Uifhin the
Constitution and La,cs for the qualification ofthis
feeling, proposes Southern Convention to devise
some mode of resistance to aggressions differences
Of opinion between the North and the South being
neither aggressions nor grievances-the true and
only constitutional means Of redress for which, in
addition to those which already exist by law, being
by amendments to the laws of the United States,
Or suggested by Mr.. Senator CALHOUN in his late
Speech by an amendment TO the Constitution of the
United States. For every real grievance alleged,
the Constitution has established the means and the
mode of redress. But constitutional redress is not
what the Mississippi resolutions propose. We
were not little surprised, by the way, at finding
in the Address to the People Of the Southern
States accompanying the preceding resolutions--a
generally lucid history and exposition Of the insti
tuition of slavery it exists in the United States
two statements which appear to to be altogether
founded ID error, and calculated greatly to mslead
the people of the South. These statements are
| First. That the non-slaveholding States assert
that when, by the admission of new States they
shall obtain three-fourths Of all, they amend
the Constitution and give to Congress new
power I'd abolish the service even in the States
where itmay be sanctioned by the local policy"
! Secondly That a refusal by Congress to re-
ceive petitions from persons demanding the abo-
li,ion of slavery has raised outcry that the right
of petition has been evaded and that that outcry
has been yielded to by Congress, thereby assert
ing a po,oer to abolish Slavery"
We do not doubt but the highly respectable gentle
men composing the committee which drew up this
Address believed, that in making these statements,
they were stating incontestable truths. But we know
of no facts to sustain them; certainly none such as
could be deemed authority. Upon such case as
these facts if they ,cere respectable facts, would
present, we should ourselves almost be ready to
become Conventionsts, instead of looking upon the
proposed Convention, as we do, with utter aver
sion, and with even more dstrust than aversion.
| Nor is that distrust at all lessened, but very
much increased by the revelation, in the same
.4ddress-though not even limited at in the Resolu-
tions-of purpose ulterior to the consultation at
Nashville The passage Of the Address to which
we refer is too pregnant with highly important
information, not to be brought prominently forward
at this stage of the discussion Of the merits of the
Nashville Convention. Here it is:
" Beside and beyond a popular Convention Of
| the Southern States, with the view and the hope
of arrestng the course Of aggression, and if not
practicable, then to concentrate the South in will,
understanding, and action, the Convention Of Mis-
sissppi suggests, the possible ultimate resort
| the call, by the Legislatures Of the assailed
States, of still more solemn ConUentions-such
as should be regularly elected by the people of
those States-to deliberate, speak, and act soih all
the sovereign poscer Of the people. Should, in
the result, such Conventions be called and meet,
then may lead to a like regularly constituted
Convention of all the assaled States, to provide,
in the last resort, for their SEPARATE WELFARE,
1 by THE FORMATION OF COMPACT AND A UNION
that wiA afford protection to their liberties and
righs''
Here is the project Of a SOUTHERN CoNFEDERAcY
confessed-nay, openly, and apparently without
conjunction, auo,Ded, and coolly recommended to
the consideration of the Southern States!
Even so late as when our last article on this SUBJ
ject was put to press-in which we inferred, from
cumulative circumstantial evidence against the mo-
vers the Nashville Convention, purposes hostile to
the Government Of the United States, and tending
to disruption Of the Union--we were UhoLy un-
aware Of this bold and undisguised avowal, as by
SO high an authority as that Of the Mississippi
State Convention, of purpose on the part OF the
Agitators to dissolve the Union to summon the
States of the South to antagonist organization
against their sister States; to array star against
star, and stripe against stripe, of our National
Enson