Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1853-12-02

man, he must inevitably have been defeated,
rs abolitionists and freesoilers would not have
supported him. That we think is fair in
ference. Does the Union mean to insinuatc
or assert that General Pierce did not expressly
approve the compromise? If so, it is guilty
OF the grossest injustice to the Chief Magis.
trate OF the nation. Does it mean to say that
the other eminent men who were brought be-
fore that convention as candidates for the
presidency, were afraid to avow their opinions,
and were willing to resort TO subterfuges, to
chicanery, to duplcity and fraud, in order to
get the support of abolitionists and freesoilers
We would not do injustice to the Union-but
we cannot hold our peace when we see that
paper pursuing a course so well calculated to
damage the reputation, for common honesty
even, of the democratic party and its most emf.
nent leaders.
Is it not remembered by every man, woman
and child in the country, that the democratic
party throughout that exciting contest that re-
suited in their triumphant success, everywhere
asseverated their sincere desire to secure the
ascendancy of pure national democratic doc
trines and measures. That they everywhere pro-
claimed, if the then candidate, the present
Chief Magistrate, should be elected, that aboli-
tionists and freesoiers would be disbanded and
destroyed; that their pernicious doctrines would
be rebuked, and they themselves be treated
with the scorn that they SO much deserve.
What contributed more than all other things
combined, to the triumph of the democrats, was
that they had set their faces against the aboli-
tionists and freesoilers. They asserted that, if
General Pierce should be elected, that free
sellers would have no influence in the govern
ment; but that if General Scott should be
chosen chief magistrate, that his freesoil friends
and allies would hold in their hands the very
reins of government. No press in this country
rung the changes on this view more than the
Washington Onion. 1t quit it at night only
to resume it in the morning. 1t was verify
labor of love to it. 1t rolled it as sweet
morse under its tongue. But "now change
comes DER the spirit of its dream" What it
asserted then, it repudiates now. To justify
acts that indiscreet men have done, it has to
take back all that once it said 1t has to stul-
tify itself 1t has to discredt the honest de-
mocracy' of the nation assembled at Baltimore,
to prevent discredit and injury to itself and
its affiliated presses. In a word, to sustain Mr..
Guthie and all implicated with him in his in
defensible New York transactions, it must rip
up the Baltimore platform-invade the secret
thoughts of the members of the convention
charge their conduct with duplicity-insinuate
a fraud, and thus cover with odium and oblo-
guy all concerned in the proceedings of that
body.
This is, indeed, bold stroke. But extreme
difficulty calls for unusual effort TO relieve it.
Desperate diseases require desperate remedies
and the disease that the Union is laboring to
heal, we fear, much fear, is past all cure
Not having room for the whole of the article
to which we refer, we give the following para
graph from it:
The proposition on which the delegates
harmonized was the result of earnest and re-
peated consultations between democrats who
entertained widely different views as to the
merits OF the compromise measures. 1t was
impossible to agree upon any proposition which
required either the advocates or the opponents
OF these measures to surrender their opinions
and acknowledge that they had been in error
Upon such proposition the disorganization
and disruption of the party were inevitable.
If the Baltimore platform had expressly APP
11r1r a,.aI al Il
nominee would have met with certain defeat.
The friends of the measures of adjustment never
had the strength to elect a President: and this
fact ought to impress itself with force upon the
minds of those democrats who claim from the
administration more consideration towards the
original advocates of the compromise than they
are supposed to have received. On the other
hand, If all the opponents of the laws of adjust
ment could have united on nomination, Ia
thing wholly impracticable,) they could have
had no hope of success
1t is true that large portion of the demo
cratic party of the south opposed the compro-
mise originally. That opposition was based on
the admission of California and the Texas
boundary bill, and had no connection what.
ever with the fugitive-slave law, which was so
violently denounced BY the freesoilers and abo-
tionists of the north and northwest. The sep
arate organizations in the south, which grew
out Of the compromise measures, were only
temporary. The issues they submitted to the
people OF the south were decided by the people
at the ballot-box in 1851. That decision was
acquiesced in, and the States rights and Union
organizations were abandoned before the Balti.
more convention assembled. When that con.
vention did assemble, there was one, and only
one, question before the country connected
with the compromise measures. California
had been admitted; the Texas boundary bill
had been accepted the territorial bills, and
the bill to suppress the slave trade in this Dis
trict, and all the controversies growing out of
them, belonged to the past. But the violent
and factious conduct of the freesoilers and abo-
litionists required that the Baltimore conven.
ton should denounce the anti-slayerv agitation