The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-11-21

were led to do from our conviction and knowledge
of the vast interests which are being daily developed
and concentrated in that quarter Of the GLOBE and in
which the United States is not without its proper
tional share. We continue to carry out this prin-
cpe, and present to readers to-day an interest
ing letter from one of our correspondents in Mel
bourne descriptive of the appearance the facilities
and the government of the metropolis of Southern
Australia. 1t will be found instructive and enter
tanning
The Washington Unions Defence or the
Cabinet.
Before the New York election took place, the
Union, the organ of the Cabinet was insolent
and overbearing to all who dared to find fault
with the appointments made by the present
regime at Washington 1t would not deign to
reply to the facts and arguments put forth in
sustainment of the allegations against its mas
tiers. Now that its eyes are opened by the re-
suit Of the election. it sings in very different
key. Statistics are most potent remedies
for bringing demented or impudent politicians
to their senses. Now, the Union, though still
evadipg the merits of the question, condescends
to argue, in a kind of way, and to make the
best defence it can for the administration.
What is the argument of the Uni0n?-what its
defence? The sum and substance OF it is an
admission Of the very thing charged. The Union
admits that the appointments are bad-it " will
not dispute that they are"-while it contends
that this is no ground Of opposition to the Cabi-
net. All that was ever alleged against the adj
ministration-all, at least, that we ever said in
condemnation Of the course it pursued, was in
reference to the appointments Through its
own advocate, therefore, the Cabinet pleads
guilty to the charge. We could not censure or
praise its policy in other respects for there
was no opportunity to do so. Its general
policy will only be developed in the
message. The inaugural was good as a
confession Of faith. But "by their fruits
ye shall know them 1t " held the word of
promise to our ear, but broke it to the hope"
We did not, and do not, accuse General Pierce
Of moral turpitude. We have said, and do say,
that he committed mistake in the construc-
ton OF his Cabinet, and this mistake has led to
all the other mistakes in his appointments, and
kept him in state Of delusion ever since.
1t was his misfortune rather than his fault,
that he fell into such hands. The most that
can be expected from him now, is to repair the
error Of Judgment when he is awakened to
full sense Of the false position in which he is
placed. We trust the New York election has,
in some degree, contributed to that result.
The Union holds that to oppose the Cabinet
is to oppose the democratic party. 1t might as
al IN SO 4
cause they betray. But suppose the Cabinet
and the democrats party were Identical, what
then? Does it follow that we should support
the Cabinet or the party when they depart from
great principles? General Pierce was not
elected by any party, but by men Of all parties,
upon the principles Of the compromise measures
settled in the last Congress, and ratified by the
people last November. To select for his Cabi-
net secessionists who were opposed to those
measures and free soil coaltionists who were
equally opposed to them, is not to stand upon
the platform on which he stood at his election,
but is such an abandonment of those principles
that, if persisted In will render it necessary to
fight the battle Of the constitution over again
Had the people foreseen that General Pierce
would have committed this grand blunder, they
never would have elected him. To discourage
the men who battled for the principles of the
compromise measures, and to give aid and
comfort to the enemies Of those principles, is
violation Of the compact made with the people.
A piebald, patchwork coalition Cabinet is not
the democratic party, as We have seen in the
result Of the late election in this State, and
shall see before long elsewhere. To oppose the
Cabinet, therefore, is one thing, and to oppose
the democratic party is quite another. The de-
mocratic party is party Of principles, or it is
not worth supporting. tit be party Of prin-
ciples and if it mas succeeded in its struggle
with the wing party in the late Presidential
election, because its mailing to the mast the
colors On which those principles were inscribed,
then to oppose a cabinet who drag down those
coloTs and trample them under foot is to stand
up for the democratic party, and do something
towards retrieving for it the vantage ground it
is in danger Of losing. But however this may
be, we 90 for the principles, and care not what
party the assertion Of those principles may af-
feet. Perish cabinets-perish parties--let prin-
ciples live.
The organ Of The Cabinet is terribly afraid Of
the restoration Of the wings in consequence Of
the baleful discords' in the State Of New York.
Who but the Cabinet is responsible for their
discords, and whatever result may Cow from
them? All was harmony till il came into power.
But what difference does it make to the coun-
try who comes into power in The future If there
is to be no regard to principles? What worse
could have happened if General Scott had been
elected last fall and the Seward dynasty had
gained the ascendant, than has happened under