The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-05-02

you will allow me 10 say word in favor OF General
Cass.
He was decidedly the fayone OF Virginia for the nomi-
nation In lsa4 SO be was In l6aS When in the former
year The course OF MIR Van Buren, upon the Texas quss-
lion compelled Virginia 10 abandon him and 10 look out
for the statesman whose standing above all others with
his party such that he could with most pIoPrey b
pat forward the competitor Of hun who bad been en-
eye al once fixed upon Gen. Cass and be became.
IN the hands OF Virginia. the principal instrument Of Mr.
Van buens overthrow. aud OF the success oil Inc dem
ocralic paryi In consequence oil which Texas was add
ed 10 Union. Without the co-operauon OF General
Cass and his friends Virginia could not have prevented
vicoa on he ua q his trends Of his iaet Ina, has ar
rayed them in bitter enmity TO Gen Cass, and prompted
them to their unpatroc course in 1885, by which they
contributed 10 defeat him and his party in consequence
OF which all Of the troubles OF 1850 thrust upon
The same influences which defeated his election then,
true TO Their hatred are at work TO defeat his nomination
now WI Virginia make him sacrifice 10 his enemies.
who are his enemies because they are her enemies II
she does, she will develop new trait OF character q
weak as Is desPicabe II is with States and sections
with ndvidualsf they desire 10 have true friends
they must be true friends in II either desert friends
for light trivial causes neither which pursues that
course will long have friends to desert But, slrS, no
such eneebIes the southern character, whatever APP
pearance OF il manifested itself in the vote in the election
OF 1913. We will, however, soon be suspected OF i
from any suspicion OF il before 60 into the Presi
dental canvass. where il will injure u.s.
Every principle Of honor and even OF policy, dictate:
to Virginia to stand by the leader with whom she shared
misfortune in her last contest with their common foes.
unless in the mean time he has done something 10 for
felt her confidence unless we less likely to triumph
under his banner than that OF another equally worthy
Ii the first let be said OF him the last let the
sacrifice be made; for in that contingency, II
would be sacrifice to every man OF correct feelings
But il would be one. in the contingency contemplated,
which that leader would be first to suggest His op.
onents seem 10 acqulesce in the justice OF his and
hence they say that he allowed one construction 10 DO
put his Nicholson letter at the South and another q
the North; and that since his defeat. he has dsavowed
the construction placed upon BY The former ana that
lodged the vote the fugve-slave law and, finally,
| that it is injudicious "to run a beaten horse"
Whether the doctrine propounded in the Nicholson let;
ter relative to the extent OF power OF the territorial
legislatures. be sound not. shall not discuss for
is emphacay now, as shall show presently Il was IN
1885, as purely abstract question, as far AZ he pres
idency is concerned, any other question OF law OF
morals it were proper to do i, i would Do easy to
show that it was the doctrine OF John Taylor o. Csr
oine, OF Thomas Jefferson and the Conges. q iso7.
and OF many eminent southern statesmen OF the pres
ent day. But what is more pertinent 10 this discussion
is, that i, is the avowed doctrine OF every prominent
candidate of the democratic party for the presidency,
including Dickinson Buchanan, and Douglas. But the
point s not much that the doctrine IS unsound 20 that
General Cass did not clearly expound It IN his Nicholson
OF l64S, which oil the two constructions placed
upon the true To this point shall con6no
myself But it may be due that should say, IN justice
TO all those great names have mentioned, that none OF
them, far know have taken ground that tsrri-
tora legislature take from any one his private prop
erty, secured to him BY the law OF the land without
just compensation To deprive man, by legiaasion, OF
his negro without compensation. held as vested properly
by law, is one thing for State or territorial legsa-
ture to prohibit the introduction OF slaves from other
States and Territories another and very different thing
The former power in the of States has been very
much questioned; the latter very little. But eysn this
distinction is purely abstract, as Tar as the presidency
concerned, as will be manifest directly.
Upon the charge Of Intended deception on the part OF
General Cass in the language OF his Nicholson e.ter
the letter OF Jefferson Davis and the testimony Of Judge
Butler and other southern senators have put m extn-
guisher All these gentlemen testify that they UNDER
stood him. [Co Davs,] from actual conference with
him, before the election Just he explains himself now
Well srs if be intended deception these were the last
men to whom he would have admitted the construction
which i is now said establishes it. Col; Dawss me
him. and suspected, unjusty no doubt. o. wisninK
for pretext 10 support him 10 preferences 70 Gen. ca.
charge the deception do moi publish the refutaton, al
though il comes from those high In their CONFIDENCE!
But is said that when. pending the canvass. General
Cass found that two conflicting constructions were put
upon his letter. he ought to out and explained
| II distinctly understood by the democ!ane pany
that after the Baltimore Convention bad laid down its
principles and it's nominee had endorsed theu that ~
should write no letters and mako no new Issues
The proprety OF this manifest The party itseli, IN
convention assembled had made its Issues Could hey
not have complained ii their candidate had Dr0uEht in
without consultation with them, others OF purely ao-
stract character To contend for such . proposition 10
TO give up the contest as one OF great party AND narrow
it down TO one OF am not contending Tor non-
committalism. Far from il contend that every parry
ought to have its platform distinctly proclaimed and place
upon II who Is It's impere0nauons ana et ue uetuo
be fought upon it, Suppose Gen. Cass should be nomi
mated for the presidency by the Baltimore Convention,
and he should thereafter be asked If he was in favor OF
the Maine liquor law, and he should answer the CUES
lion, and the sdmit IL 10 be legitimate issue IN the
entail election would not every democrat say that
he had done most Unauthorized thngi Yet, practically
speaking that matter has quite much peTtinency to the
presidential contest the question whether territorial
legislature has the power 10 legisate in respect to the
relation OF and slave, one doubts II has in
respect to the relation OF and wife and parent and
child Let me illustrate: No law erecting territorial
oyernments from the adoption OF the Constitution TO
this time, has required the Affirmative sanction OF
Congress to laws passed BY them The power in all OF
been reserved TO Congress to disapprove their laws;
but its approval has never been required 10 give
them validity The only event, them in which terrific
rial law 20 before the President s in the event that
Congress dsapproves IT, Suppose toral legelature
should prohibit the introduction OF slaves into the Terri
tory, does any believe that Congress would veto the
law What northern would vote for ~ How many
southern would refuse TO force upon people, 10 De
affected by il, institution TO which they were avstse
Congress- as every candid will admit, would not veto
such law and, by consequence, the qussuon YOU'D
laure Tree 10 act should pass Law protecting the mas
iers rights would there be any danger that Congress
would veto it, and the question be thus carried bsiofe the
PRESIDENT The doctrine complained Of fob,de the dea
This latter thing, however, under the reign OF fsnshcssn
might possibly happen and 10 the only possible way in
which the question could 60 10 the President In that
possible contingency would the South regret having
President entertaining the views Of the great men have
referred to- and who would be bound by them to zee that
they lrampled upon by congressional majority
Mr.. Polk wrote his Kane letter. Two constructions