The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-06-08
Mr.. webster. H.n.,s sps.s..


IN which we applaud Mr. Webster for his rankness and
patriotism, well as his great ability, without following
our remarks into the deductions which were inevitable
from The political disclosures OF that speech II u.s. per
has too much for expect the justice respect
10 ourselves that we promptly rendered Mr. Webster
but this shall prevent US from The performance OF
our duty We never fear to speak the truth TO the
people, and shall not dstrust the justice OF the udg
ment they will render when facts are before them
The statements that hal often ade-showing that
the agitation OF the slavery question originated with
the party which has always opposed democracy,
and that the political organizations growing out OF
that agitation, and cherished until they were able 10
menace the Union, constituted responsibility, and
fearful one which the present administration had 10 an
iorwere repeatedly denied by the leading mem.
beers oil the wing party that thought loo much praise
could not be given Mr. Webster for the frank manner
in which he had presented his testimony TO the truth of
such statements Extracts were made from that speech
placing beyond contradiction our assertions or if there
any disposed 10 question the fairness of infer
from admitted facts the speech itself there to
enable the reader to how far right wrong
We were about 10 take up this subject again, and show
that il was not only in respect TO the modern manifesto
tons OF political antslavery that the wing party stood
anayed against the democracy, and responsible for
the grea, national calamity which averted by the
Compromise but that such has been the nvaabe
tendency of their views OF the constitutional powers OF
the federal government from the time 1t was organized.
when we found article in the Boston Post which to
great exen, anticipates views. For the present,
therefore, instead OF pursuing the inquiry which had
commenced, and which shall hereafter resume, we
ask the attention of the reader the article from the Post
in the following words:
Post, June 5.
# Democracy and Nalion ality.
The speech OF Daniel Webster at Buffalo is universally
looked upon OF ordinary Importance. The ad-
m'nisiratlon endorse II, his political friends approve It,
and the wing press generally sanction IT, II is regarded
something like Presidents message. Hence it is
worth more than passing remark; Tor lays down, what
Is something uncommon IN such quarters The principles
upon which the wings propose 10 stand party on the
great question OF Stale equality and as 10 the admission
OF States into the Union.
That we may not mistake the position OF Mr. Webster
and his friends, quote the following passage which
where he is speaking OF the admission OF LOUIS
lana, Flords Texas, California, New Mexico, and Utah
into the Union
My opinion remains unchanged, that it was not in the
original scope design oil the constitution admit
States out OF the foreign territory and that for one never
would consent and no matter may be said the Sy
conventions any other asseblage OF insane
sonsl never would consent that there should be one foot
Of slave territory beyond what old had
AZ the time OF the iorma tion oil the Unon'
That's because Louisiana or other territory happened
to contain slaves, therefore Mr. Webster would have
admitted it. and even as to California, Mr.. Webster
goes tar as 10 say 81 voted against The acquisition,
,oanted none OF her (MexIco's) territory, Caiornla.
New Mexico, nor Utah" In tact, the principles he lays
down go against all future acquisition OF territory slave
territory or no slave terrory-isanst all admission OF
States, formed out oil territory now foreign, into the
Union
Now, this has the merit of frankness and clearpess
But is new doctrine in this quarter. Ii is the old
Eal. aid a Ia
treaty and of the federal opposition to Jeersons admin
lsIation. How clearly and decidedly this policy was laid
down, how perseyerngly II was adhered TO, how fac
ouy al times was urged lei the history OF the coua-
Try iron 1893 10 1874 We shall not do more
than allude 10 IT, The principle then laid down by the
iederaliss was, that II putting the Union in peril
violating the national compact, to admit new States
formed without what the territorial limits OF the old
States, nasmuch as destroyed the balance OF
power TO prove how long this view was adhered TO, II
may be stated that committee OF the Massachusetts
legislature, IN June, 1913, (Josah Quincy chaunan)
made elaborate report against the then recent admis-
sion OF louisiana State, and panied II with
OF resolves nsucng the senators and requesting
the representatives OF this State ITO their utmost en-
dedpor TO obtain repeal OF this act OF admission No
slave territory then the cry sectional appeals
then prevalent as they are to-day; the slavery
subject then filled large space IN the public journals
and the theme OF legislative debates, Just IT is
and the policy OF opposing the acquisition oil ter
territory Just much creed OF the federalism oil
those days II is OF the whggery OF the present day.
Mr.. Webster rs no more IN favor OF the admission oil
new territory to-day than he was ioTty years ago.
"Were the territories OF the United States sufficient
y extensive before The annexation OF Louisiana Z" Is
the question asked IN the Massachusetts 1913 Temop-
straUce against the and the same question Is IN the
mouths OF the same sort Of politicians to-day.
The for this were as frankly avowed as The pot
icy itself. Besides the above there deeper reason
still 10 wit, the dlsrus this school OF politicians
entertained OF the form Of the American government and
OF the principles which IT founded. II was re-
garded a weak government temporary IN It's charac-
ter, incapable OF holding together the States, and a
stronger government regarded Indispensable hay-
log President chosen for lie and Senate tor lie.
Hamilton's model The British constitution, and others
went with him. II any doubt as 10 the views OF the
leaders OF the federal party this question: recurrence
their printed leeIs will be enough TO satisfy the mos,
skeptca And then, too the basis oil this government
its democratic featurewas strongly objected to- Our
disease is democracy exclaimed Fisher Ames IN 1906.
" II is the skin that fesiou--our very bones are
carous, and their marrow backens with gaDgrene
This dsrust OF our Institutions and their political basis
pevaded the speculatons and influenced the political &C
ton of this school OF politicians; and tins IT was that
made their opposition 10 the extension OF our territories
still stronger.
Now this issue then was frankly met BY their demo
era tic opponents IL fairly rendered Their policy
look ed 10 extension OF ierrtoryo acqusltoD-to an
nexation--to the spread OF American nsutoDs-io the
growth OF American power-to the tulhlmen oil Amef-
can destiny Let their works testify how pertnacously
they cung bread view OF politics They did not ac.
qurs Louisiana because she had saves-no such Thing
bat because II political ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS II was
due the welfare and progress and security OF the ma
uon and the argument against this acquisition was pre-
emlnently sectoDaout and out sectional and geograph
cal The may be justly SAID OF the annexation OF
Texas This, also, was political necessity. we DO not
deny that sectional argument al the South was used to
Justify and promote II, but still high above u rose me
national argument just so II with California In THIS
case, too the secopasm rose up against ihe al