Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1852-05-20

Fiat Justice or Southern interests
FFoula permit
70 have met wilh tho foregoing
Fentence in the G llumug Of a respect
kble wig newspap per, during the can
Fass for Governor last summer, would |
have shocked the nerves Of curl
k:oatest wings, judging from the
manifestations they then gave, upon
witnessing the democracy exercise
the right-of which t4ey should ever
he proad-to speak Of objections in
the Compromise. According to whig
ethics il thoss days, it was next to
treason, to utter 4 word in opposition
TO those measures To say the South
did not set just ice in their passage,
would be to peril tie existence of
tie Union NoF it would appear,
i3o time IS about to be changed by
fqme of our vi Jig editors. They
SEEM to tAink, the democrats we're
not far from ri ht III the opinions
they entertain ID of the Compromise.
Some Of them Seah now,slmmon oour-
Age enough to sly, "In the Compro-
mise We made every cosebssion,''' &c
How are we to understand this evil
d9nt and striking change on the part
IF orr Wig contemporaries? What
have ne a right to conclude? We
4on' Ike. to think hafd, much less
apeak 50, of,these would-be guardians
Of the republics veal; but in conjur-
iag Up a satisfactory answer to these
questions, We are iiresi stibly forced
10 conclusion Which reflects upon
. their intelligence or patriotism.-
When they were yociferating in praise.
Of the Compromise insisting that
Southern interest, Justice and homer
would i ot change it 10 the extent Of
redottihg an |, or fecrossing a =
they were unpardonabIy ignorant, or
treacherous to patriotism; or party
letters and love Of the loayes and
fishes ware toe great f9r both. Sec
Ing that some qf them now come so
near The truth as to the Sc measures,
perhaps it souli be bat fair, and only
! warding them sheer ia iice, TO con-
J dlude that they we're acting, during
the last canvass, ID obedience topar,y
II atlHer than love Of cou4try-know-
Ing tneir rights, but not during to-
defend ,hem. If tbs conclusion be
q rreet, what a lesson to the dupesI
Of party! To endorse and applaud
:. m easure tc the sacrifice Of honor
aad justice, in obedience 10 party
Is Il not revolving u the diguity of
q. freeman? But suppose our position
to be erroneous-that our wing
ffiel4 IDS in the So nth took their stand
Oh the Compromise. ia obedience toll
rArty-and suppose that they were
actuated by a clq Jar impulse of patri-
otisin-are they bot no w to have cast |
them, BY the North era portion bfI
their party, serpent rather than ia |
Ii Sd? Their fH orite and, as They'll
v oald have it, the rullcr to the ship
II etale-when brought to the test,
seems to meet with no favor with the
y higs in the North. AS to makingl
t4e Compromise q ffaq,ity-they
lfpot at the very idea. They say it'll
" ID denationalize tie wing party,
a I'D, they win never consent to it,.
Nov, is not this top badz-the whigE
pRrty denationalized if the Compro-I
mise be made final settlement of
the slavery question? Seriously, and
ii all eandor, if We were a.whig, and
cbtertained the belief which we heard +
many Of them . xpress during the
d st canvass, we would not act an
other day with the Northern portion
Of the wing party We cannot see
hpw We could with consistency and
q due regard to the interest of our
c@untFy. If the discussion of the
Compromise be -treasonabIe-leading
I'd the severance Of the Union what
win you denominate a. tontending
for lie repeal Of the fugitive slave
[.