The southern press., 1851-07-04
The Washlngtsn Unien.

nv III SeSalSiug uS--Auu thcIcOy ttduSbS00nos
those limits of decorum and propriety which We
have uniformly observed towards him and other
political opponents.
Much allowance must be made for the trials
of temper 10 which the editor Of the Union il
subjected in consequence Of the awkward and
absurd position he occupies. And perhaps hi.
manners have hpen impaired by his diplomatic
residence in one Of the semi barbarous contries
of Europe
We generally prefer to exhibit the attacks Of
our opponentsin their own language, and at full
length. But the Union is 20 prolix that at pre-
sent we cannot find room. The assault, like a
wounded snake, drags its length through col
umn and half
we shall however, ATTEMPT TO do it Justice
by extracting Il e most characteristic passages
The first rarasialh is as follows:
The RE~HriIcSs or l798.-The Southern
Press, true t'' us vocation since its establish
ment, il eteady "a, the employment Of all the
means which c;,' inilutye the public mind and
widen the brein'' 'nusca 10y the question OF
slavery. II circii'-ta,rcs arise to justify the
hope that South CaI"lira viii abandon the pur.
pose OF secession, and ,l.at the entire South,
united IN maintaining t',c execution of the Flu.
gltlve save law, can once mere repEe on the
assurance that the Northern portions of the
Union are better informed un ihr nature of
that compact OF the Constitution which g,laran-
tees the right of property in -a,r-. III, organ
of evil renews the fires Of its furnace an.l sends
forth fresh streams Of the lara Of is treason
and disunion. That these terms are ,ot too
harsh to characterize the conduct OF the N- ,,ih-
ern Press, will appear from the sls l,,s, ,,l,nce
ut some of its leading avowals.
The imputation of treason is wort'l ,l.ly ol
the court of the despot of Prussia, Where the
editor of the Union resided not long $40 a
minister. If the idea is not borrowed from
that, it could have been obtained only from the
dregs of low-fung Federalism in this country.
No man who has read and remembers the Con-
stitution of this country, could make such an
imputation on us, unless he had an extraord
nary natural proclivity for blunder, or had been
immersed in the system of domestic Federalism
or foreign despotism. If we were to descend
to epithets, we could apply that of treason with
much more propriety to the editor of the Union,
for be asserts the right of revolution, although
he repudiates the right of secession. And what
is the right of revolution but the right of COM
mitting treason with chance only of escap-
ing the penalty by the accidents of war? Such
is the refutation of the Union's doctrine, which
is made by its definition-such is the proof Of
its sbsurdity, deduced from its consequences
The Union denounces US for insisting vet on
extending the line of36.3O to the Paci6c,nnd says
that it is impossible-as we'll as incompatible
with State sovereignty. Why impossible? After
all the professions of devotion to the Union
which have resounded throughout the country
are we to be told that justice to the South is yet
too great price for saving it? And as for State
rights, if Texas can be bought out, why cannot
California? Is it constitutional to buy territory
and sovereignty of Southern State and not of
Northern? or is it confessed by the Compro.
misers that the Constitution operates differently
on Northern from Southern States
Why we have more faih in the Union than
the editor of the Union-and if State fights
rere violated in buying from Texas, the bad
practical consequences at least of that measure,
will be compensated by buying from California
The Union quotes long passage from Mr.
MADIsoss letter to Mr. EVERETT, in 1890 j.
which the resolutions of '9s are constrS~ ! 70
mean by State interposition, only the ~ ,y;,ar,
control of the people and legislatar &c Tho
States over the government of tho limited
States ALI this was known beff re nj. omit,
well known that Mr.. MADISON borcsd ii. .r.
TEN of principles after the cs' ebrated victory Of
the Republican party in J. ,os Tber ho ,,s
opposed to national hv X to a n,o,ec,ive t,r;e
ana 70 isoersl INTERNAL improvements. He after
Ha'oS supported all But we don't rely on Mr..
MADIsoss latter o onions. Mr.. WEBSTER pro-
,es'eu '.e" IN is4O, in his Richmond speech
"eare 'o' =" opinions of Mr. MADISON in 1898
inc p''"''p' s that brought the Republican party
'n'o P'" er. That party never adopted, and
never az victorious, on the opinions of $780,
hno 70 show what the opinions of '9S were, VIZ
~s the following from the address of Mr.. Ma
DIsor, as chairman Of committee of the Vir
ginia legislature in 1900, in defence of the reso
lutions Of '98
"lt appears to your committee to be plain
principle, founded in common sense illustrated
by common practice, and essential 10 the nature
Of compacts, that ,ohere resort can be had 10 no
tribunal superior 10 The authority Of The parties,
the parties themselves mua be the righyul judges,
an the last resort, Dhefhcr The bargain made has
been preserved or rioldted. The Constitution of
the United States was formed by the sanction Of
The States, given by each in It's sorereign ca
pacity. 1t adds to the stobility and dignity, as
well as to the authority Of the Constitution
that it rests on this legitimate and solid founda.
tion The States then being the parties to the
constitutional compact, and in their .orere,gn
capacity, it follows, Of necessity, that there can
be no tribunal above their authority, 10 decide in
the last resort, whether the compact made by
them be violated; and consequently that rs The
PARTIES to It, they must then nselpes decide in The
last resort, such questions as moy be Of sufficient
magnitude TO require their interposition "-VoL. x
p. 548.