North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1852, 1851-08-09

THE REGlSTER-STATE SOVEREIGNTY.
Now that the election is over the Raleigh Register
afford to be LIBERAL and even just and truthful in
its discussions of public questions. We have few
plain facts and propositions bring to the attention
of that journal and call upon the public 10
mark the in which these facts and propositions
will be received, and the responses which will be
made to them
Some weeks since the Register published Mr..
Websters Capon Springs Speech, delivered in the
morning, in which he spoke of using force in
tain event, against South Carolina but that paper
suppressed and discredted Mr.. Webster's remarks,
delivered the evening of the day, and doubt
reported by the pen that reported his morning
Speech; and the reason given for this was, that MIR.
Webster had been unsupported in his evening Speech
that it could not be possible that Daniel Webster
should have uttered the remarks attributed to him
on the subject of State sovereignty. Well, we pub
llshed his evening Speech-we applied his remarks
in our feeble way the condition of the unry-and
we then determined to await patiently the authorized
version of this Speech, which, it was said, would
appear soon.
We now make the following extract from a true
copy of the Speech, which published in the Ma
tional Inellige of the 10th of July and will
be from this extract, by those who will take the
trouble to consult our first publication. that Mr.. Web
ster has said here substantially what he reported
to have said the time the subject of the compact
and State sovereignty:
" If the South TO violate any part of the Con-
stituton Intentionally and systematically, would the
North be any longer bound by the rest of it! And
if the North were deliberately, AabifuaHy and of faced
purpose, to disregard part of it, would the South
be bound any longer to observe lis other obligations
How absurd 1t is to suppose that, when different
parties enter into compact for certain purposes either
DISREGARD md
theless, the other to observe it intend, for
regard, and maintain, and carry TO the fullest
tent, the Constitution of the United States, which
have to support in all its parts and all its pro-
visions.
l do not hesitate to say, and repeat, that if the
Northern States refuse, ,Olguy and deliberately to
carry into effect that part of the Constitution which
respects the restoration of ug slaves the South
10OttH longer be bound 10 observe The compact. I'm
mense applause.] II bargain broken side IS
brnken all sides. | do not mean, of course, that
every violation by State of article of the Const-
tution would discharge other States from observing
It's provisions. When any part of the Constitution is
supposed be violated by State law, the true mode
of proceeding is to bring the before the judicial
tribunals, and if the of the State
law be made ont it is to be set aside This has been
done in repeated cases, and is the ordinary remedy.
But what mean to say is, that if the public men of
large portion of the country, and especially their
Representatives in Congress, labor to prevent, and
do permanently prevet, the passage of laws necessary
TO carry into effect provision of the Constitution,
particularly intended for the benefit of part of the
country, and which is of the highest importance to it,
1t cannot be expected that that part of the country will
long continue to observe other constitutional provis-
ions, made in favor of other parts of the country
Now, what does the above amount to- Does not
Mr.. Webster distinctly take the ground that, if the
free States should deliberately violate the compact,
the slave States would be released Is not this sol
Does he not say, in many words, that "a bargain
broken on side is bargain broken all sides''?
Certainly he does-there it Isl in the plainest sort of
English. Well, then, what follows! Will the
Raleigh Register tell US We challenge that paper
to take up this point and ans,Osr US. We challenge
it say lohat oo,Os in the compact is deliber
atey violated in the and in the manner spoken
of by Mr.. Webster The Register has at length said,
in response 10 questions to it the subject, that
if Congress should repeal the fugitiveslave law the
Editor would be for resistance with all the means
that God and nature have placed in power. .
HoU would the Editor resist? Mr.. Webster says
that that law should be thus repealed the compact
would be broken by the free States, and the slave
holding States would be no longer bound to observe
it, the Register says it would resist. Resist what
Mr.. Webster says would, in the event of the re-
peal of this law, be released from the compact, and
from all obligations the General
Government; but the Register says it would resist,
and of it means in saying that it would re-
sist the General Government, because that Govern
had failed to perform its duties under the COM
non Constitution. Such is the absurd predicament
IN which that paper has placed itself by its opposi
ion to the doctrines of State sovereignty.
We now call upon that paper again to meet US on
hese points. The argument upon them has scarcely
,een begun. Now is the time for argument-the
elections over, the minds of the people calm
md cool, and we can all of truth clearly
md deal with facts with less prejudice than hereto
ore. Is the Register ready? Will that paper res
'ond? Or, responding, will it meet the question
arly1 We shall see.
LATE FROM SAN FRANCISCO.
Another dreadful fire visited San Francisco on the