The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-12-05
The Democratic caucus.

thorlZed to say that no such letter has been re-
ceived by any department of the Government.
The Democratic Caucus.
GAS to the news from Washington, we hardly
understand it as yet, and must be contented 10
witt patiently the denouement."
Thus writes the New York correspondent of
the Washington Union in regard to the course
| of the DEMOCRATIC caucus in repudiatng the
Compromise measures. The same exclama-
ton will come from other quarters besides
New York. The people of every Congres-
siona district, North and South, East and West,
who have returned to this Congress men who
sustained and supported the measures of Ad-
| justment, will be as unable 10 understand the
news as the correspondent whom we have cited
above. And as far as our contemporary of the
| Union is concerned, he is determined that they
| shall remain in ignorance of its real meaning.
The true Interpretation of the news is this:
| The opponents of the Compromise North and
South in the DEMOCRATIC party have triumph
ed over the friends of that measure in both
sections The Freesoilers and the Fire-eaters
have combined TO put down those who stood
by their country in the darkest hour of its peril
AS some of the extreme Southern men openly
| declared, after the result, ''the Compromise
men attempted to drive us out of the party, and
we drive them out" Had they endorsed the
Compromise, it would have been to us a
matter of generalization, for above all things
we desire peace on this agitating subject.
The WING party has purged itself of Free
| b,, al I.ta "a
its representatives, and we would have rejoced
to see the DEMOCRATIC party do the same
thing; for though their numerical strength in
Congress may be increased by coalescing with
such men as Messrs. MEADE, VENABLE, Pres
TON KING, and RANToUL, any victory they may
achieve by such unholy combinations must ne
cessarily stimulate and perpetuate local and
sectional agitation.
+. 1t will not be inappropriate at this time to
review the position of some men in the caucus
contrasted with their position prior to their
election. AS general rule at the South all
candidates Except in SoUrH CARoLINA) who
occupied an ultra position on the Compromise, in
some measure receGed, and declared thai they
tcere ceiling TO acguiesce in said measures. We
may assert, indeed, that not man who refused
to acquiesce in the Compromise was reelected.
How inconsistent and strange their position be-
fore and since the election, has been rendered
by their action in the caucus of Saturday night.
For instance, in the State of GEORGIA the fire
eaters before and since the election said that
they would acqulesce in the Compromise. Col
onel JACKSON, the Representative of the first
district, could not act politically with Mr.. COBB,
who was and is Compromise man. but comes
here, and In convention composed of such men
as CLEVELAND, RANToUL, and Preston KING,
votes down a resolution declaring the Compro-
mise ''FINAL sETTL EMENT" of the slavery
question He could not act with Mr.. CoBB
and other patriot citizens in GEORGIA in sus-
tanning the Compromise as a final settlement Of
this veXed question, but can act with Messrs.
CLEVELAND, RANTouL, and Preston KING, in
repudiating it. Yet, strange TO say, the class
of politicians typifed by Colonel JACKSON pre-
tended TO believe that the honor Of the South
was not safe in the hands Of such men as
| Messrs. CoBB, HuLYER, JOHNSON, MURPHY,
CHAsTAlN, FooTE, WILCOX, FREEMAN, Ma
BORIS, and those DEMOCRATS of the South who
CALAMITY stood by their country in the late con
test. And so we might 90 through the whole
South, and point out men in almost every South
ern State who occupy the inconsistent position Of
Colonel JACKSON, Of Georgia-such as the
! Messrs. MEADE and BococK, of Virginia;
VENABLE and DANIEL, of North CAROLINA;
HARRIs and BRAGG, of Alabama. To the PEG
pie of the South it must appear that these
gentlemen were either insincere in their de-
claratons before the election, or having by
such declarations obtained the confidence of the
people, threaten to abuse it by keeping up, with
the Freesoilers of the North, the agitation
which all good men deprecate.
Why is it, it they were willing during the
campaign to acquiesce in the Compromise,
they are unwilling now to say so Is it to
spare the feelings of the abolition DEMOCRATS,
who have been elected upon the sole ground of
their opposition TO those measures Do these
men prefer as their political associates the
Freesoilers of the North to the Conservatives
Of the North and South They cannot, from
the nature of things, have both. II they are
right now in repudiating the Compromise,
Messrs Com, FooTE, BAYLY, JoNEs, and the
minority of the DEMOCRATIC party South. were
wrong in supporting it. But this is question