The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-11-22
Interference OF the Administration In ST "A
Elections w hat Is the Cabinet Policy 3

take strong ground on behalf Of the Sout' 4. 1T
would be well fox correspondents and nev SIMON
gers to be more precise in their terms. Does
this mean that the message will be cor whed in
tone of regard for the Union, as o sposed to
Northern disunionists, or that it " in CORES
pond in substance and point with the State
rights speeches of the South? TT is is point
worth determining. II We take the previous
character Of Gen. Pierce as u ,rcundworl for
inference and collate our dedJ .ctirrs with the
inaugural the former viii apr ear the more ma
tural Interpretation; if on the contrary. we
give faith to the assertion 81 at this coluring is
only given to the message in consequence of
the general dissatisiactio caused by the free
soil procliyities of the Cabinet, we shall be
bound to regard the lat Der as the soundest by
pothesis. II again. the messcge should breathe
| pure spirit Of love or the whole country, it
viii cheer riany a he Art. aad will do all that
words can TO efiace t ae memory of the deeds of
the last Sw months. But if it appears on the
face Of IT, mere piece of captrap, designed to
cajole the South by an affected espousal of their
most oxtravagant pretensions. it will make bad
worse, and viii destroy the last shred of hope
st2kod on PRESIDENT Fl2rce.
Wesay that the distinction is important. 1t
is the more so, because facts, not words, have
| shows too clearly that hitherto the policy OF
theCabinet has been in perfect harmony with
the latter rendering OF the statement. On three
| distinct occasions the administration has inter
tered in the State elections Of this year. Ia
two out of the three cases they have been igno-
miniously defeated although they had spared
no means, fair or foul, to gain their end In
| two out of three cases their interference
was unequivocally on the side opposed to the
| Union doctrine. One was in the North; and in
! that the Cabinet took part with the open eae-
| mics ofSouthern institutions The other was
in the South: and in that it sided with the ene-
mics of the compromise and the extreme South
ernrights party. In both, the administration
gave solid earnest Of its hostility to the COM
promise Let us examine the cases in de-
| tail.
Had no unusual circumstances complicated
the issue, there would have been no principle
at stake in the recent election in this State
1t was at best, mere contest for spells. No
body took any interest in it but those who had
| their eye on Office. Had it not been for the an
noyance which the clamor of the Van Burens
and that ilk had caused to respectable people,
no attention would have been drawn to the
business at al, and it would have passed over
as mere form without substance. The case
was slightly different in Mississippi There was
among the people Of that State good deal of
| slumbering feeling on the subject of Southern
| rights. They had accepted the compromise and
Foote as its representative but they had done
so reluctantly. and their reluctance had deep
ened into regret at the consequences which fol-
| lowed. They had seen the anti-sonthern course
Of the administration without comprehending
it; and in view of injuries inflicted on the South,
they had clung more tenaciously than ever to
their peculiar rights, without clearly Identify
ing who it was that assailed them. With them
there was principle involved, and that princ-
pie was no thing less than a ratification or re-
traction Of their vote of two years ago. Such
was the political aspect OF New York and Mis-
sissippi before the election.
With these facts before them, the federal ad-
ministration had three courses to pursue. 1t
might have held itself entirely aloof from both
contests, and this plan would at least have been
in accordance with the dictates Of sound policy
and constitutional usage. 1t might have thrown
what legitimate influence it had into the scale
Of that party whose fundamental doctrine was
the principle on which it was elected and
whatever might be said Of the propriety of this
course il might at all events have been de-
Tended on the ground that it was essential to
carry ous the compromise. and that over-zeal in
such cause was almost praiseworthy. The
third course was to take sides with the enemies
Of tie Union in both States-to favor the Van
Buren free sellers here and the Southern-rights
secessionists ia Mississippi. This course was
treacherous TO the people, inimical to the Union,
and disgraceful to the government; and it
was the course adopted by the present
administration. The free soil letters of Davis
and Guthrie intended to tell upon the
| election here, and the ultra Southern rights
letter of Caleb Cushing, telegraphed at an enor-
nous expense to Mississippi, to influence the
| election there. and defeat the nominee Of
! General Cass-Colonel Foote-were, in every
| point save one, most glazing and palpable con-
| tradictions of each other; but there was point
in which they tailed. With the views with which
they were written, both were base, perfdious,
and disloyal; both were deliberate acts Of trea-
son to the people, and direct violations Of the
pledges on which the administration had been
placed in power.
| 1t may be some consolation TO the Cabinet,
| smarting under its defeat in this State, and the
overwhelming rejection Of the Massachusetts
/ constitution, which it paternally endorsed as an
| . administration measure y ia know that IL las
| gained one victory: 1t has defeated the Com
promise in Mississippi. 1t has gained glori
Gus triumph over the two leading survivors Of
tho fathers or that immortal measure-General
Cass and Gov. Toote. Such victories are IN
doultcdly grateful to the wounded feelings Of
| 10 1nnn.h nra IL must he snnihinn for thnrn "a