The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1850-07-22

The editor of the Union begins by replying to
some commentaries of ours ona previous article
of the Union In that article, which is quoted in
the extract of to-day, it will be plainly seen, that
the Union rebukes the Nashville Convention for
asserting new principle. II says, "The Mis-
souri, Compromise, as they have brought it for
ward, is nelo and distinct proposition, which
admits the right of Congress to forbid slavery
north of certain line, propided it recognizes il
south of that line, THEREBY giving to Congress
The jurisdiction over the subject OF slavery.
| Now, the old Missouri Compromise admits the
right of Congress to forbid slavery north OF
certain line" So does the Nashville Conven-
ton PLAN But in addition to that, it requires
g slavery to be recognized south Of that line
That is all that is pretended to be nep, in the NASH
vile Convention plan and the Union thereupon
charges the Convention with "thereby giving Con-
gress The jurisdiction over the subject of slavery
| Here is n Southern man, on Southern soil, con-
demning large and respectable body of South
ern men for asking Congress to recognize sla-
very south of a line, if prohibited north of it.
The editor of the Union has repeatedly said he
was in favor of applying the Missouri Compro-
mise to the pending question. In this very arti-
Gle he says he is anxious" for it. He has said
the South would accept nothing less" He is
in favor then of prohibiting slavery north of the
line, but he condemns the demand to recognize
it South of the line, as giving jurisdiction to Con-
gress over the subject. To prohibit slavery is
not taking jurisdcton---to recognize il, is! And
it is right and proper for "a Southern man to adj
uocate prohibition North and to condemn recog-
ton South!
1t is true, the Union says, that the prohibition
of slavery north of So. 80. is unconstitutional,
and is opposed to it, though "anxious" for a
compromise that contains that prohibition, but
condemns and will not BIO reconciled to one that
couples with it a recognition of slavery South .
The case is too plain to be misunderstood. The
position of the Union is too glaringly and palpa-
bly, absurd and faithless to be defended, disguis-
ed or palliated And of this the Union itself
appears to be conscious For when thus detect
ed in. fagrante delicto it adopts the well known
expedients of detected culprits. 1t first resorts
to audacty Itquestions whether our remarks
were meant to apply to the Union" and if they
were, asserts with an intrcpidty that Professor
Webster could never assume, {" that they are
utterly and entirely without foundation, and that
the author of them must have known they were
without foundation when he wrote them" This
is perhaps the most intrepid experiment on the
gullibity of its readers, that even the Union has
ever made But, as if the Union thought that
do to let the case rest here the Union resorts to
another very common eXpedient Of confuted dis
putants, and that is to divert attention to some
thing else 1t flies from the question under dis
cussion to invoke the aid Of party and personal
ity. 1t insinuates that the editors of the South
ern Press are both Wings, or infected with
Wing associations and therefore not to be lis
tened to by Democrats when exposing their or
gan. But we cannot indulge the Union even in
this abject and humiiating subterfuge. 1t says:
"We have not been in the Wing camp to learn
the secrets of Wing tactics We have never,
like the senior editor of the Southern Press,
learned the art Of catering for the Wing palate
by an apprenticeship with Prentice of the Louis
rifle Journal; nor have we, like its junior edi-
tor, endeavored to make Federalism acceptable
to the Southern people by editing Wing paper
in South Carolina. We know not when the
one dissolved his connection with Prentice and
the Louisville Journal; but the other retired
from the Telegraph only a few weeks ago. 1t
is probable therefore, that one, or both of them,
advocated the elevation of Mr.. FILLMORE, think
ing that his votes in Congress- and his Erie let
ter were matters of but little Importance in COM
parison with Presidential election"
This the Union thinks entities us to the or
ganship of the new administration rather than
itself And it is sklfully appended to its at
tempted defence of its monstrous doctrines on
the Compromise, to divert attention from its
failure.
Now, the senior editor of thispaper is Demo-
other Wing. Yet neither of them
supported or voted for General Taylor or Mr..
Fillmore, or General Cass. We knew, or thought
we knew, that they were all too much alike-all
ready to sacrifice the South to Northern ma
adopted policy which leaves the South prac-
tically not one foot of the acquired territory
Most of the members of the new Cabiuet inclu-
ding Mr.. Webster, and Mr.. Pearce, together with
Mr. Fillmore himself, We're in favor of the pend
ing Compromise plan, with Mr.. Clay and Gen.
Cass and the Union is the most Jealous, labor
ious and obstinate print in this city devoted to
the same thing. Which ought to be the new
organa
As to the imputation of an apprenticeship of
the senior editor of this press to Mr. Prentice Of
the Louisville Journal, or any connexion between
them, it is utterly unfounded. The senior editor
of this Press has written articles occasionally for
the Louisville Journal because it has the largest
circulation Of any paper in the Southwest, but
never on party questions except two. One
was the Bankrupt law, and the articles were
| AGAINST n Tho ntbar Woo tho Nov;.,n vr,r and