Daily American telegraph., 1851-12-26
Foote and Rhott.

FOOto and Hhott.
We have said that we do not agree with either
of these gentlemen. We do not believe that the
Compromise u.s. or should be considered an ad-
justment, much less satisfactory adjustment, of
the slavery question nor do we believe that the
best remedy for abolition is secession. Differing
from both, we would be respectful to those who
differ from us. Candor however, requires us to
say that we consider the movement made by Mr..
Foote as much more dangerous to the Union than
anything which could be accomplished by Mr..
Rhett. And for this simple reason: If it be true,
as Mr.. Foote and his associates assert, that the
Compromise is a satisfactory and final adjustment
of the slavery question, the attempt to denounce
and prescribe all men who do not believe it to be
so will coerce them to defend themselves from
unjust imputation, and thus keep the merits Of
the Compromise before the country as the chief
political issue. This will enable such persons as
Mr.. Rhett to make infammatory speeches, de-
nouncing the Union. Mr.. Foote presents the
Union as the end of the constitution. Mr.. Rhett
denounces the Union, as the cause by which
the South is most unjustly oppressed and de-
graded. We need not 60 beyond the debates in the
Senate, nor beyond the speeches Of Messrs. Foote
and Rhett, for confirmation of this. Now, who
does not know that the immediate effect is, that
others take sides-some with Mr. Foote and some
with Mr.. Rhett--and thus the South itself is di-
vided whilst the North, from the very nature of
the discussion, takes part with Mr.. Foote? The
necessary consequence of this union of the entire
North with party in the South, on question
affecting the interests, the honor and character
Of the South, gives to the party who assume to
be the champions of the South all the benefits Of
sectional sympathy, and enables such persons as
Mr.. Rhett, by such appeals as he made in the
Senate in reply to Mr.. Foote, to embitter the
South against the North, and thus strengthen
that party who wish to dissolve the Union. We
must take men as we find them. We must look
facts in the face. And he is blind who supposes
that the people do not see and understand the
motives of men who get up issues and seek for
Office at the expense of the section in which they
reside. Who does not know that the Compro-
mise has now become sectional question THAT
all parties in the South admit that the adjustment
was more favorable to the North, and against the
Ooutn HHo uoeS NV oc0 tnau " uSltuto lHe
question now must irritate the South because it
reminds the South of its weakness, and of the de-
sertion Of those to whom the South had confded
the protection of their rights and interests? Why
then, should any friend of the Union revive the
agitation? Why should Mr.. Foote demand a
declaration by Congress that the Compromise was
right, when he knew that very large body in
the South believed it to be wrong? Was it not
because he wished to strengthen his own political
position as pretender for popular favor? And
does not his revival of the agitation, by renewing
the discussion in Congress, show that his pretence
of attachment for the Union is but the mask
which cloaks his own selfish ambition?