The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-09-23
Another Bid for the Presidency,
LETTER OF MR.. J. *. PAULDING, SECRETARY OF II
NAVY UNDER VAN BUREN.


HYDE PARK, Duchess county, N. Y.,1
September 6, 1851.
GENTLEMEN Your letter directed to me at New
York, conveying an invitation to address meeting
of the citizens Of Charleston district to be held in
Charleston South Carolina, on the 18th inst, has
just reached me at this place, where now reside.
For the compliment thus rendered, and the
language in which it is conveyed, beg you to
accept my Acknowledgements, accompanied by
regrets that cannot comply with your wishes.
Distance and space, the burden of years / should
bear with me, and, more than all, my ncapacty for
public speaking, compel me to decline task for
which am totally united. What have to say
therefore hope you will permit me to address to you
through medium to which am more accustomed.
AS it appears from the tenor Of your letter thai
you are already sufficiently aware Of the opinion |
entertain with respect to what is whmsically called
the compromise, will only trouble you with brief
recapitulation. In my view it was gross and pal
pabe violation of that great fundamental principle
Of State equality which pervades every provision of
the constitution, and forms the asis Of this confe
deration; most upjustifable attack on the rights
interests, safety, and happiness of hall Of the
states composing it, accompanied by insult and OBJ
force OF NUN bers from minority aud that in Is
consequences it will prove more "a .sl to the repose
prosperity and happiness, if not the very existence
OF the l MON, than any measures that may be re
sorted to in attempting to obtain redress for the
past or security for the future.
Such being my view Of the subject, | am, and
always have been, of opinion that the stand
he Southern States, in opposition to the princi-
pies embodied in that series of measures, was not
only justi6able, but demanded by proper regard
Tor their rights and their honor and that IN
abandonment of the position they then assumed,
and an acquiescence in measures they repeatedly
declared they would resist, =" a. all hazards, and
to the last extremity" unless accompanied by q
frank Acknowledgements Of having been wrong in the
first instance, would in the language of the printed
resolutions appended to your letter. be what they
could not submit to without dishonor." If such an
abandonment Of all previous pledges and declara.
tions were the result of subsequent conviction of
having greatly erred in making them, it would be
honorable and magnanimous But such appears
not to be the case since even the advocates of
on which these pledges and declarations were
based, as well as the wrongs which first called them
forth.
The association is, believe, right in its second
resolution, declaring its belief that the cooperation
of any of the Southern States with South Carolina,
either in resistance secession Is at least impro-
bable, so long rs the influence and patronage ofthe
general government are arrayed against State
any probable change Of admins traton will produce
change Of measures; since, as you will perceive
cm their repeated declarations all parties in the
North unite in denouncng slavery, and maintain
ing the constitutional right of Congress- as well as
its piexibe duty, to prohibit its extension to any
state that may hereafter be admitted into the
Union From all present appearances, the princi
pies I'm boiled IN me compromise will continue to
be the oasis Of the future policy Of the government
IL seems also probable that the States which have
submitted to past, will be equally quiescent under
future wrongs.
Having thus briefly stated my views with regard
to your first and second, | will now revert to your
last and most important resolution, namely -
II hat, failing in reasonable time to obtain the
so'oreiaton OF other Southern States, South Caro-
lima should alone withdraw from the Union"
IL seems rather late in the day to be called on to
combat the old exploded doctrine of passive obedi-
enee ard non resistance the assertion Of which cost
one monareh his head, and sent another into perpe.
tual exile Yet, as that doctrine has lately been
received by some Of the highest names Of the re-
public, 1t calls for n passing notice in connection
with the subject Of this letter. II seems strange,
too, that this long buried monster which received
its death wounds in the two revolutions of Eng
land and America, should have been dug up and
retuscitatei by distinguished democratic republi-
can statesmen. From all but the darkest regions
OF the civilized world this portentous phantom has.
teen bsnished. as il would appear only 10 find re
uge in that which processes TO be ae most free and
eLlighttrtd. There is not European writer or
statesmen, OF theologst, of any established reputa
uJn, that would nov venture TO proclaim the
slayi;h principles which have been Inserted by re-
tuelcer Leaders in the halls Of Congress of rcpub
i!ean states.
a thorough discussion Of this doctrine of passiv,
ootuienee ana non.resistan,e on the part Of equal
members Of confederation of states would require
more siace thsn Is proper for me to occupy, and
more time than you can spare on this occasion: nor
60 deem IT necessary. The right of resistance by
an extension Of the individual right Of self defence
winch Is a law Of nature antecedent aud paramount
TO all laws and ell contributions which cannot be
aenated or surrendered by the adoption Of any sys-
ten OF social organization. This doctrine is estab-
Inhed beyond controversy by the unanswered and
unsnswerab'e arguments o. Sidney and Locke, by
the assent all the great ancient as well as modern
authorities on the law of nature and nations and il
such were not the case, il has always been, and
always will be acted upon when the occasion arises
IN orrosiiionto all authorities Ii Is true that none
81 the writers who assert concedc the right Of re
,istanee baye attempted TO define the precise line
where resistance becomes justifablc, because IL Is
ret susceptible of definition IL is matter Of feel.
irg, and can neither be snalyzed nor defined
An eminent American statesn man, high la Office
ard candidate for still higher honors. whose opin
ions wish to treat with all due respect has lately
attempted to establish broad distinction between
revolution and secession; ia other words the right TO
resist and The right of retiring out of reach OF the
nteessiiy OF resorting to resistance. His position
It rightly comprehend him, is, that though n peo-
pie or state lay have right to resist by force in
certain contingencies, they have none to retire
Ieaceably beyond the reach Of injury and oppres.
SIGN IT seems they have no alternative: they must
either peacesbly submit. or torcty resist, tor tb,v
"a A. o. faaf 90 L.. 4. - =