The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-10-04

Hos JEFFERSON DAVIS, of Missssippi, ha
suffered himself TO be put in nomination 10
the office of governor, in the place Of Gen
Quitman. He is to BE- run, not ~ dsunionst
secessionist, or an Z Southern rights candidate
but simply as Democrat, on the old issues
The leading Southern rights organs have
announced their intention TO look upon the late
election as decisive of the slavery question il
that State, and have declared their willingness
to yield to the popular will and abstain from
any further " agitation" Of the subject.
The Union party, it seems, carried the election
by about six thousand majority only, while II
appears that something like twelve thousand vo-
tiers remained away from polls " deci-
sion" by no means beyond all hope of repeal
But if these Southern rights men are unx-
ious to show their obedience to the popular will
as they call il, why do they not act in accord
ance with it, indications and vote for Foote, in
stead of Dapis Foote, we believe, calls him,
self democrat but whatever he is, democrat
or federaist his doctrines have been approved
by the people--that is to say, if This election, as
his opponents affirm, is decispe Of the issue be-
tween him and them.
So too, we notice, some of the papers Of the
same school of politics in our own State, begin
to talk about the public mind needing repose--
the propriety of laying down our arms and yield
ing to the declared will of the people.
Indeed This ia new doctrine to us. II
is the sick that need a physician, and not they
that are whole" The question involved in the
late elections is one of the mightiest that has
ever been agitated in this country, and one
which is to have a controlling influence upon
the interests Of the South for generations to
come. If it were question of minor magni-
tude-the results Of whose decision were only
temporary in their effects; or if the election
turned upon the choice of one particular State
measure over another rival policy---both OF
which had the same end in view, it would be q
very different matter.
But as it is, not only is the very existence OF
slavery involved in the controversy, but 1t has
also direct bearing upon the great issue
whether we and those to come after us are to
enjoy the privileges Of free government in this
country, or are to be reduced to state of abject
and degrading vassalnge, and to become the vic
Tins of ruthless and atrocious despotism.
Must we, therefore, of the Southern rights
party, who are engaged in cause having sucf
momentous int: ests at stake, throw down ou
arms at the first unsuccessful skirmish with Tho
enemy, and unmanfully relnquish the contest
forever? 1t seems to us that such reasoning
would better become those who are fighting
for private and personal interests, than such as
are battling FIR great principles and the welfare
of their country.
Again: IF that doctrine is true why not carry
it out in all instances, and throughout the entire
| Union? If we are to yield our convictions tc
the popular will in all cases, then why not throw
away our arms at once, and let the Free-soilers
md Aboitionists, who have controlling inf1u
ence in the general government carry out theil
DESIGNS and eradicate the system of slavery it.
self from the whole country rs soon as they
pease? Or, to confine ourselves to State juris
dcton, then, wherever and whenever the Whig'
may gain the ascendency, the Democrats shoult
from that time forth quietly give up the contest
refrain from all further "agitation" and gran
the people political "repose" till the crack o
doom, or until they are aroused from their stupit
apathy by the clank Of tyrants chains.
No, the more instant and pressing is the dan
ger by which truth and right are threatened
the greater is the necessity for the aid of tn
stout hearts and sinewy arms of their avowe
friends and Championships.