The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-03-24


times. and upon all proper occasions, they viii
maintain 1t. We believe, in the language Of
the Kentucky resolutions, that where there Is
no common arbiter, each party to a compact ID
To Judge of the iniractions of the compact, and
of the mode and measure Of redress"
The State, We say" is to be- the judge of in.
| fractions of the compact aud OF the mode and
measure of redress" II, in the language of the
Kentucky resolutions, the State believed that
the compact has been violated, she, and she
alone, has the right to Judge, SO far as she her
self is concerned, of that infracton and the mode
and measure of its redress. desire to ask my
colleague if he does not indorse the Kentucky
resolutions, and whether The whole Union party
of Mississippi does not indorse them! II he
will say to us, by authority Of his party that they
repudiate these resolutions will guarantee that
they sink SO low, rs political party, that, though
you sounded for them with hundred fathom
lead line, voice would still come booming up
from this mighty deep, proclaiming, mo bottom
here"
desire to submit this proposition to my COL
league lie says, that because We assert the
right of secession, therefore we are secession
lists. Non constat He asserts the right of revo-
luton Let me ask my friend, do you consider
yourself as revolutionistg Ii am to b de-
right TO secede, may | not turn upon my assail-
ant and say to him, You are revoluiionist, be-
cause you assert the right of revolution?
But, sir, this new Union organization-this
party which claims first to be the Wing party
par excellence, and then to be the Democratic
party par ercellence-to what sort Of sentiments
does it hold Ask my friend here, Mr.. VIII.
cox in the presence of our colleague of the
Senate Mr. BRooKE, who has lately arrived in
this city, Gentlemen, what are your opinions
on the subject of the currency" My friend
would doubtless Say something about hard.
money, and gold and silver but our colleague
in the Senate tells us that he believes in paper
money, and banks. Suppose the two gentlemen
should be asked what they thought on the sub
iect of protection My friend here would CON-
mence lecturing you about free trade; but his
colleague in the Senate would begin to tell us
how much protection we want And it would
be thus in regard to distribution, internal i'm
provements by the federal government, the sub
treasury and upon all other party questions. If
you ask them what they are for, they tell you
they are for the Union. But MS to what polti-
cal measure they propose to carry out, they do
not at all agree, even among themselves.
Why, sir, if | may be allowed, in this high
counc-place, to indulge in an anecdote, think
can tell one illustrative of the position of this
Union party, and especially the Union party of
my own State There was an old gentleman
who kept what was called the "Union Hotel"
A traveller rode up and inquired whether he
could have breakfast. The landlord said,
"What will you have :" SWELL" said he, 'rl
take broed chicken and coffee" 81 don't keep
them" "Let me have beefsteak and boiled
eggs, then" 81 don't keep them" "Well, said
~, mind. ,riu
to eat" 81 don't keep anything to eat" "Then,"
said the traveller, getting little out of patience,
.feed my horse; give him some oats" II don't
keep oats" "Then give him little hay" 81
don't keep hay" swell, give him something to
eat" 81 don't keep anything for horses to eat"
( Laughter. "Then what the devil do you
keep" al keep the Union Hotel" Renewed
laughter SO with this Union parry. They
are for the Union, and they are for nothing else
They are for that to which nobody is opposed.
They are constantly trying to save the Union,
and are making a great cutlery about it, when, in
fact nobody has sought or is seeking to destroy
il. They keep the Union Hotel, but they don't
keep anything else.
Now, sir, to come a step further in the pro-
gress of Mississippi politics. AS soon as the
election in our State resulted adversely to my
friends aud to myself, we, as a matter of course,
abandoned the issue upon which it had been
conducted. We gave up contest in which we
had been beaten But we did not change our
opinions as to the soundness of the principle. 1t
was contest for the maintenance of partcu
lar State principle, or State policy. We were
overthrown by majority of the people of our
own State, and consequently we gave up the
issue. Immediately afterwards, by the usual
authority and in the usual way, there was no.
tice inserted in the leading Democratic papers
of the State, calling upon the Democratic party,
without reference to new State issues, and
without reference to past disputes, to assemble
in convention for the purpose of appointing del.
egates to attend the Baltimore National Demo
cratic Convention. This was in November,
1851. Almost Immediately afterwards, the
Union party called a Union convention, which
assembled on the first Monday in January last
1t was represented by about thirty six delegates,
from twelve or fourteen counties. On the 9Th
of the same month, the Democratic convention
proper, assembled, represented by some two
hundred or more delegates, from fifty-five coun
ties Our convention was called az a Demo
cratic convention. II assembled rs Democratic
convention. ltdeliberated as Democratic con
vention. 1t appointed delegates to the Balti
more convention rs a Democratic convention.
1t appointed Democratic electors. 1t represent
ed emphatiealy the Democracy of Mississippi
Having been beaten on the issues Of State poll
cy, repeat, we gave them up. We so publicly
announced; and when we met in convention on
the 9Th Of January, it was as Democrats on the
old Issues.
How was il with the Union convention? Was
that a Democratic convention Was there any
such pretence! No, sir;it assembled as Union
conventional Union meeting to appoint dele
gates to attend Democratic national convcn-
ton. Why, what an idea What right had
such meeting to appoint del gates to Demo
cratic natoaal convention? Ii the Union party,
calling themselves Democrats, may appoint del
cgates to the national Democratic convention,
why may not the free Democracy of Ohio, typi-
fled in the person of the gentleman across the
way, Mr.. GIDDINGs, do the same thing2 They
claim to be Democrats, and have organized the
free Democracy; and why may not they send
their representatives to the Democratic conven-
ton! Suppose the Freesoil Democrats get up
an organization, why may not they send dele
gates too? and why may not every. other fac
ton and political organization have its repre-
sentatives there! No, sir; If there is to be