Columbus Democrat. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-18??, 1852-05-08

to any national convention under any party name
chaierer, Let this fact be borne ia mind, as
we shall have use for il in the sequel OF our ar>
gumeui.
Their second remedy was a call Cir South
ern Congress, whose duiy il was to have been 10
arrest future aggression and TO restore those con
stitmioaat rights that We're lost by the passage Of
the COMPROMISE; m, failing in this. to pr0pide for
their future safety and independence, What
that body may do in this latter respect ,cbea heg
meet, | cannot say, nor do care. There may
perhaps, be those present who have looked more
into that matter than | have done, and who may
enlighten the House on the subject.
Such, then were the principles with which
this Southern Rights party set out a, Nashville.
During the heated contest which followed The
adoption Of the compromise In Georgii, these
doctrine we're openly proclaimed and warmly
advocated by the adherents Of this new political
sect. Nor was their anger appeased or their pas.
sion satiaed with the avowal and advocacy Of
these heretical doctrines bat as if from the very
fountain OF bitter waters, they poured forth one
continuous stream OF abuse and execratou upon
the heads of a--whether from tho North or
| the South whether " hig or Democrat--who had
participated in the passage of the compromise
measure. They hesi,ated not TO declare that
Cass had committed a fraud upon the South in
bis doctrine of non intervention Buchanan
had deceived them in his promised support of
the Missouri mpromise--Douglas was a trick
ster, whose ridiculous pretensions 10 the Preei.
dency were a fruitful source of bitter mirh--
and the whole catalogue of good and true men
al the North, who had stood firmly by the South
10 her many struggles for constitution al right,
were alike unworthy Of their support and base
betrayers oftae confidence they had in them. -
One ofther leading journals, (CounfTus FINES,
speaking of the purposes and intentions Of The
Southern Rights party in respect to Northern
men held this language:
i" We think WE have good right 10 know
their Southern Rights men feelings and opn-
ions and we say that they can discover ia 40
Notbeip statesman now in public life, Wig or
Dsmocrat, one who hey can consistently support
as true man % The cause of State rights or
Southern rights These men may he few or ma
ny in number, bu' they viii be enough 10 render |
intellectual anu attempt 10 consolidate national
party. Their divorce from the North il II piacu
10 mqtrim0nir rhev will have Southern can.
didtie, Southern organization for in THESE
ALONE CAN they pat their trust "
These views, thus poiutedy expressed, were
nothing more or loss than an aiirmanoe Of the
doctrines. Of the Nashville Convention. They I
were responded 10 in the feeble echoes Of the
prominent presses olther part aud were clam.
orously aud more oflansiyey advocated in the
vapid deolamation ofihoir travelling ministry
MR.. BROWN, of Mississippi The genles !
man seems disposed in the cou. Sc of his argu /
mpnt, 10 hold The State. Rights party orthe Sou /
responsible Cor the Nashville Convention, and 4
Tor all that it SAID and did. desire To ask the /
gentleman this question Has it escaped bis
recollec ion that that convention was gotten up
jointly by Wings and Drmocrats--hy gentlemen
who are no Union men aud who are States
Rights men Has il escaped his recollection
that the honorable ~ iim l.. Sbarkey Of my
own Stare, prominent member Of the Union par.
ty, was the iirsl President ofhe Nashville Con-
venlion flhere be mischief sprnging from
that convention, | trust Il will be divided be-
tween both political parties.
MR.. Gil ASTAIN. win respond 10 the in
qniry ofthe gentleman, and will frankly say to
him that Il was gotten up a. he says but at the
same time say to him that when that conven-
tion promulgated Il, damning doctrines. the Tn.
ion party left them, We went with you no far
Their When you shovel your hand that you
were determined to run alou Of the Union of the
country, then il was that the Union party desert.
D
promulged by that convention.
Mr. BROWN. will ask the gentleman,
then, this other question Whether il Is not with
Ia his recollection that that convention was de-
nGunced before ils first meeling--beiore its first
organization, in the same spirit IN which it is
now denouncedl The National lDielligencer,
published in this city, denounced it as treas
enable organization. Il was denounced by
members ulon this floor, and il was SO denounc-
ed through the country. Did all the leading
members OF the Union party who have now be-
come so clAmorous ,gainst the Nashville Con-
vention, Join in This denuncialon when il was
irst made by the Intelligencer and other papers
Mr.. CHASTAIN. | can only say in reply
to that inquiry. that ! did not then see as clear
as The editor Of the National Intelligencer. lie
might have seen evil brooding. even in the an
licipaion of the assembage Of that convention.
did not see il until they had shown their hands.
When had ocnlar demonstration by their own
action. | cnuld not be uhiIl 10 relation 10 their
position. TIE gentleman would save me irou. /
bic BY not inierupting me any more. He will :
have an opportunity Of setting himself righi II be
Wfcns--and feel confdeni that be is--be- Z
fore the termination Of this session. | only {
ak 10 be permitted uninieuupiedy 20 pursue my
remarks. Ifthe grutlsman wants 10 say any {
hing viii eudsasor all can to aid him in get j
ing the floor. {
MR. BROWN For the purpose Of setting :
nyseifrigh, wish to make one remark was {
rot a member of the Nashville Convention, had Q
loihing 10 Do with the getting Of i up, bad no u
esPensibiliiy on account Of iis action and now ?
ask the gentleman can he say as much Did q
ie no', member ol the Georgia Legislature, Z
ave something 70 d. with the getting Of THIS TAR ?
AIMED convenii0nl .
Mr.. CHASTAIN. can say to the gentle c
nan that | w-s not member The Georgia .
-egisiaiUre at that time. ] was a member Of a
--.-. 1919. th.t r....l-..aa In. dc. a