Daily American telegraph., 1852-01-19

past year there were eighteen hundred and tif-
teen brick houses built in that city, assessed at
over two million three hundred thousand dollars
In the last five years, nine thousand four hum
dred and sxty-two houses have been built. The
time is $84,7S9,642.
From the southside Democrat
The Washington ,sh Union" and state
Some time since, with the best intentions in
the world, we animadyerted upon the sneering
and denunciatory language with which the Wash
ington &c Union was wont to express itself III
regard to the State Rights doctrines entertained
by q portion at least of the Democratic party: 1t
was manifest that the course OF the Union, If
continued, would defeat the very aim sought by
the editor, by exasperating the feelings OF
respectable portion of the Democratic party, and
thus battling oil hope of its harmonious co-ope-
ration. Anxious to preserve the good-feeling
and strict organization Of the party, we ventured
to demonstrate against that severity of re-
proach with which the 8. Union delights to CEN
sure the State Rights men Of the South. Our
feelings were not appreciated and our meaning
was perverted, for the g Union" actually attri-
butes our conduct to hostility to itself and the
party, and summarily proceeds to excommunicate
us from the communion of the Democratic
and with proper ceremony Illuminated its displea-
sure against the erring sinner. Now this was
exceedingly unl<ind of the g Union-'' 1t
kind to impute to US unfriendly motives. Why,
if we had been actuated by feelings of hostility,
we need only have encouraged the g Union % in
the course it was pursuing; for our enmity
would soon have found abundant qualification in
the forfeiture by the I" Union " of the confidence
and support of the great body of the Democratic
party. 1t was unkind, too, thus violently to
thrust out of the Democratic party one who is
so seriously attached to its principles and SO
anxious to contribute something to its success.
May we not hope that the " Union will relent,
and that, tempering justice with mercy, it will
consent to absolve the penitent? But seriously,
our comments upon the course of the +" Union
were suggested by the warfare which it wages
against the doctrine of State sovereignty and the
right of secession. There are points of difference
between members of the Democratic party; and it
struck us that the national organ Of the party
could more successfully promote its harmony by
the advocacy Of principles in which all are
agreed, than by necessarily denouncing doctrines
which cherished articles of faith with at least
the Southern Democracy. 1t was therefore to
arrest the " Union in its " insane and suicidal"
course, and not to crafty any feeling of hostility
that we suggested the propriety of its ceasing to
censure those who differed from itself in regard
to the sovereign rights of the States
Did we choose to cotinue the controversy with
the "Union," we might undertake to show that
Madison, Jefferson, and Polk all acknowledged
the sovereignty of the States and the right of seces
sion. We might demonstrate the absurdity of
conceding to the States the possession of any
rights, while we deny them any legitimate and
constitutional means of enforcing and maintain
ing those rights; and we might demand of the
''Union" if, by reducing all the defensive RENE
dies of the States to the ridiculous right ofrerotu
ton, it means 10 make their resistance to the
encroachments of the federal government an act
of treason and capital crime. But, although we
are elected by the g Union" from the Democratic
party, we still feel so much soicitude for its sue
cess, that we will do nothing to destroy its har-
mony. We prefer rescrving our combatiye zeal
for the enemy.
We dismiss the subject with notice of the
following paragraph from the "Union:"
"One would have supposed that in Virginia, at
least, there is no wish to revive the discussions
upon the abstract rights Of notification and Sc
cession. Whenever a practical application of
these rights has been claimed, the verdict Of Vir-
ginia has been in accordance with the position
occupied by the Washington Union"
This is very ambiguous language Strictly,
the "Union" merely asserts that Virginia has
been opposed to the exercise of the right Of Sc
cession; but its language would produce the i'm
preston upon the casual reader that the verdict
Of Virginia has been against g the abstract right
of notification and secession" Here is another
ambiguous exprcssion-why couple notification
with secession, and represent us as advocating
both doctrines That the verdict of Virginia
has benin accordance with the position occupied
by the Unon," is mere fancy of the wr-
ter's brain BY every mode by which the public
sentiment of the State can express itself, it has
pronounced in favor of the abstract right Of Sc
cession. For the truth of this assertion, we re-
fer the editor of the " Union to the representa-
tives of Virginia in the present Congress-espe-
cially to the representative of the Metropolitan
District. We refer him, also, to the public acts
of our legislature, which has asserted for Virginia
the right Of secession. And lastly, we adduce,
in proof of our assertion, the testimony of the
Democratic journals of the State, every one of
which maintains the ''abstract right Of secession
If the "Union" predicates its denuncation of the
doctrines of State sovereignty and secession upon
the supposition that the sentiment Of the Demo-
cratic party of Virginia is !" in accordance with
its position" it literally counts without its host
The .'Union is fatally mistaken if 1t imagines
that the Democracy of Virginia will sanction its
sentence of condemnation against him who dares
these doctrines