Semi-weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1852-1853, 1853-07-06
OclaIs myssif amOag slls nubsf. havs opPsssd nanv


oclas, myself among the number. have opposed MANY
astefnl and extravagan schemes by tie State, some
OF which s lead OF promoline The interest OF North
SaroIiRa coo dted 10 benefit our sislek States
al our expense and because we are opposed 70 In
ieflal lmpfosemehi by the General Government, az
cept for oNSecis clearly national ileir character
We are falsely and Improperly charged with oPPosi-
lion 10 all State Improvements. Other Democrats
have ad vocateu all the Improvements the subject OF
Controversy in the State and they falsely repre-
scented as being in favor Of Internal improvement by
The General Government. Now, improvements oy
the State and those by the General Government are
altogether different things. confusion however on
the subject is not difficult, and hence The great care
we ought to.exercise TO maintain our integrity.
system by the General Government heretofore Prac'
tised is of the most corruptng of all questions
Take illustration. The opening OF Nays Head
ia believed TO be strictly National work. Our re-
preventative moves appropriation. He is told an
appropriation will be placed in The general bill 1t ne
will for the whole. He refuses and loses the APP
preparation. He consents, and while he receives $780,
600 for Mays Head votes away 50 900 900 for works
local and unconstitutional, nringes the rights Of the
States, enlarges the powers Of the General Govern
ment, perpetrates a system of bargain intrigue and
log rolling and il checked by the people will
certainly terminate in the Capitalization OF all powers
in Congress- and the erection OF grand Consolidat
ed National Government. Can State rights Demo-
Gratis equivocaie this subject 10 obtain benefit TO
their Dstricts-and 1t Democrats do rot stand snrm
| what may expect?
! Again, we hear those who repudiate division of
the proceeds of the sales of the public land advocate
division of the land among the States, and dsIinc
ton attempted which to my conception in principle
is the difference betwiXt 'twedledum and twedledee
Another corruptng appeal TO our feaIs and avarice
W want improvements and schools in North Caro-
lima. Give US the lands. say they, and we will have
them Hith0ut tores.' Objectionable distribution
of the proceeds is, mnsl insist Benneus Land Bill
is much more so. All the objecl ms to the former
scheme with additional ones apply TO the latter. In
what relative situation do you thereby place the
States You create source of pickering and Bit
terness, of competition and controversy which de-
sloys those aIerna feelings that should character.
ize the members Of this confederacy. You complain
that the land will be squandered among the new
States What will prevent the new States after your
division, from acquiring the land by eXorbant taxa
ton in the most offensive manner! And yet Dr1fes-
scd State rights Democrats North Carolina are ad.
vocaIing this odious dvisinn and distribution
cure w hig support? Are they crlating follow
in the footsteps Of Of their successful iusirious
predecessors Again We are met by Democrats with
strong opposition free suffrage and the arguments
advanced will apply in all their force the compro
misses of our present Constitution. Free Suffrage
destroys Of these compromises, aud amendments
by Legislative enactment require all propositions 10
stand upon their intrinsic merits. How can we aci
in harmony when such positions are maintained by
! Democrats? II is utterly impossible that can
succeed party except upon a concurrence in
principles of public policy. believe the people oil
North Carolina will sustain the true Democratic doc
aud will repIobare this spirit of disorganzaiIon
For my part prefer being in d sound minority rath.
er than in unsound majority, and trust the impure
Hay be winnowed out.
| In speaking thus plainly know l shall subject
myself to censure and iIiberal remarks from some
but have always make it point when speak. tc
do SO freeman who knowing his rights dare main
tain them. l can only hope that these suggestions
may be profitable, and submit them for what they
are worth. AS my name is submitted to the public
through the press, it is proper that my opinions
should be made known through the same channel.
ASA BIGGS.
! SPEAKING AT THE CoURT HOUSE. very good.
~ number Of our citizens were present last night al
the Court House to hear the speaking from Messrs
AsHE aud LEAK, candidates for Congress. The dis
cussi IN commenced little after o'clock and con-
cluded about IL. MIR. Leak led of. His arguments
and positions, although given less in detail than up
the occasion OF the former discussion here Tues
day OF Court week, were substantially, and in most
cases, verbally the same, and il will not therefore,
be necessary 10 go into them now further than to
tice two items,-the first, in regard to po MT
upon which il would appear from his remarks thai
We had in one Of our articles, misunderstood his po
siIon in regard to alternate sections. We say
80 But alIhoug we cannot go, as Mr.. Leak does fol
alternate secIisns,'' etc. Perhaps should have
said LAS Mr.. Leak says that he would have done
ifit could have been shown that the remaining sec
lions were thereby much enhanced in value tc
repay the Treasury Tor the sections granted" The
report Of The Secretary of the Interior 9hoWs that they
have been enhanced, and we therefore see lit
tie difference in the matter, but as Mr.. Leak seems tC
think differently, we cheeTuIy give hin the oeneh
OF the correction. Another matter which would
notice is, the assertion that the Dem ocratc party I'D
never taken the same grounds in regard 10 the land
, themselves as in regard to the proceeds. This !
contradicted by the fact that the last Democrat
Convention OF This State passed resolution unan
mously, directly bearing this point, ard distinct
naming the public lands and not the proceeds. Nj
Leak alluded TO his position in regard TO Cuba an
, the haIbor Improvements, upon which he and Mi
Ashe agree that further reference is necessary
Mr.. Ashes reply Of the most successir
n efforts which have heard that gentlena
make and in our humble Judgment completely nt
every point raised by his competitor. He state
without any decentralization what he believed to b
the and The causes Of the opposition to hiI
= among certain parties here and elsewhere Throughout
4 the District.
Towards the close Of the debate considerable warmt
was evnced, especially in the ejoinder of Mr. Leal
but suppose all these things pass off, as perhap
If they should do, with the occasion.
s Perhaps, we should add, what we had overlooke
e in the hurry ofpenning the above remarks, that
q Leak emphacally stated that he would support
Is man for Governor the next election, who did n
come out Of his distribution policy not
q the nominee of the party to which he claims to b
long One strange peculiarly about this declaration
'r that Mr. Leak stated, in the course of his remark
g that his notions upon this subject were avowed
d long ago as 1876, when he wanted 10 be Governo
~ and vet he bases claims upon the party for his exc
p lions in favor Of Governor Reid, who and W;
n elected upon platform directly the reverse, and tn
e too at a time when Mr.. Leak says that his opinion
% were the same they are now. What can We THU