The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1851-02-20

acy IN the NATIONAL COuncls w III 'u0y o""-
nit to the will of minority, representing
Class Interest of the most odious character, rem
dered potential by Executive lnhuence? Shall
we all pass under the yoke, and acknowledge our
seves conquered? Shall we patiently look on
while shareholders and their auxilaries monopo-
lie the Government, and anti-slavery men are
prescribed, as the hated victims of political lep-
ROSY? Is it to be borne that belefin the equal
ity Of the human race 10 natural rights should be
treated as a damnable heresy, and action in ac-
cordauce with it, be punished as high crime and
misdemeanor?
What is to be done? We can vote our Prin-
cples into office We, who believe slavery
curse, and Liberty q blessing, and that the Gen
eminent was constituted to establish and extend
the latter not the former are the majority OF the
American People, aud it is for us to say whether
our Ideas shall be stamped upon the Government
and give life to its operations or whether it shall
be controlled by the Principles Of those who would
make an institution which even the corrupt Mon
archsm of Europe asspewed out of its mouth, the
vital element and distinctive symbol of American
| Democracy.
We take it for granted that the majority have
resolved not to submit to the spotheoss of Slavery
in this Union-not to acquiesce in the policy OF
an Administration which is labOhng to shield it
from the adverse influences which are gathering
and concentrating upon it from all movements In
all quarters conducting to the advancement of hui
manity
They intend then to vote--to use the balot-box
| for the establishment Of free principles This is
what is to be DONE but how is it to be done
| How have the Compromisers, though in the mi
poritv. carried their measures, and parslyzed the
will of the MAJORITY By waving, for the time,
their differences on ordinary issues, and uniting
their forces in one effort for slavery. They have
taught us a lesson Hunkers of both parties in
the Legislatures Of Missouri and Rhode Island
united in the support of common candidates.
Why could not the liberal men Of both parties
have done the same Is Freedom Of less value
than Slavery Hunkers in the Legislatures of
.Massa4b7xrtts and New ,York.eye 'ioHsly CO.
operating to defeat the election of any candidates
unpledged to Compromise. Cannot liberal men
unite for their overthrow
On our first page we publish two cOmmunica-
lions from lcngtred friends of freedom, propos-
ing united action of national character, in orpo
sition to Slavery. We entirely sympathiEe with
the feelings that dictated the communications, al
though we might not concur in all their sugges-
tions.
1t does not seem to US practicable to re-organ-
izc a national Liberty Party and were it practi-
cable, we see not what is to be gained by it at
present We must do two things---aecure the con-
troll of Congress, and determine the character
of the Chief Executive. Ia every State We should
take measures to insure the election Of anti
slavery men, And this is to be done, not by
National Convention or any other extraordinary
national movement, but by using our influence and
franchise wisely in our respective States What
may be sound policy in one State, may not be in
another Our particular measures must be de-
termined by circumstances, not by. distractions
In Wisconsin and Vermont, the Free Soil men and
Democrats. generally, have united and constitute
a Free Democratic Party Those anti.slavery
men who could not adopt Democratic principles
have reunited, we presume, with the Wing
Party. The proposition to form new party in
either Of these States, on the single issue of
Slavery, while a strong organization exists which
others, Of coarse is not to be thought Of
In Massachusetts,, the old Liberty Party has
been merged in the more efficient, more manage
able Free Soil organization, which, while main
tanning its independence and distinctive charac-
ter proposes COO peration with either Wings or
Democrates, where, by this means alone, it can
secure the election of anti-slavery men. 1t is not
supposable that the Free Soil men of Massachu-
sets will ever return to the policy of the Liberty
Party, the frst maxim Of which wac, no union
under any circumstances, or for any purpose, with
other organizations. similar Free Soil ergani-
cation exists in Ohio, which acts separately or
comparatively, just as the one or other course of
policy may best the election of anti-slavery
men. Should the Democratic Party, in a certain
district, be willing to unite with them in the cleo
ton of an anti-slavery Democrat aad il be certain
that, by separate action, they would insure the
success of bunker, it seems to US there can be
no doubt of the duty of joint action Where
they can elect, without cooperation, or where it
is obvious that they cannot determine the mme
date result, by separate or joint action, we sup
pose il is best they should have their own cand-
dates.
In Illinois, the anti-slavery men appear to think
separate action, in all cases, the best policy for
that State, and they have therefore, recognized
the Liberty Party, adding, however, some prin-
ciples which that Party did not originally en-
brace
In New York, the majority of the Liberty
Party men united with the radical section Of the
Democracy; some with the Seward Whigs-the
rest are found in the Gerrt Smith party. IL
il in vain to think of recognizing the old Lib
erty Party in that State its materials have all
found their appropriate place. Seward Wings,
and radical Democrats in New York are strongly
anti-slavery They have adopted anti-slavery
principles as part of their respective creeds and
arc evidently prepared to extend their application,
as they may be able, Certainly they can never be
persuaded of the necessity or policy of Abandoning
political organic ,tions which they control. In
their State elections, they generally can out-vote
the autagonstic sections of their respective par
ties and in districts where this Is impossible they
cah uhi'e Vlhpor"ihy, "i'n' 0''''"i'" VI i'"nA-
erisn.
In States where Free Soil men are agreed on
Democratic Principles, it would doubtless add to
their efficiency, should they adopt Democratic
platform generally, as they would be more likely
to impress the Democratic Party, regenerating
or absorbing it. 10 States where the agreement
of opinion among Free Soil men is confined to the
single issue of Slavery, we cannot see the pro-
priety of risking q division among them, by
the attempt to adopt common political creed