Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-01-22

oficious in noting the fact that the PROPOSE
| tons in the Senate for the amendment of Mr..
Douglass bill have proceeded from members
Of the two parties which are irreconcileably OBJ
posed to democratic ascendency. Although
these propositions emanate from quarters ap-
parently antagonstic to each other, yet il can
do no harm for democrats to bear in mind that
| their antagonism does not prevent them from
harmonizing in antagonism to the democratic
party. 1t may not be out of place, also, in us
to bear in mind that our party has come nearer
to making shipwreck of its fortunes upon the
slavery question than upon all others. If we
understand democracy, the sentiment on which
il prides itself above all others is, that which
claims for the democratic party principles on
which alone the federal Union can be perpetu-
ated. We assert with confidence the claim
that we are THE Union party, and we claim that
by our action at Baltimore in 1852 we clearly
illustrated and established this claim. Whilst
exulting in such reflections, it may be well for
us to scrutinize with care the movements Of
those who are our uniform opponents. That
abolitionists would rejoice to see the fires
OF discord rekindled by revival Of the
slavery agitation, no one can doubt. And
those who have perused the extracts from
Senator Summers speech which we lately pub
iished will not be slow to suppose that agitation
is his object in offering his amendment. On
the other hand, there is nothing in the past his
tory OF the whig party which ought to make it
offensive i'll US to say that of late years its only
hopes of ascendency have been based upon the
slavery agitation in some one of its FORMS AT
least, we may intimate that the wing party can.
not show by its past record that it has proved
itself better friends Of the compromises Of the
Constitution than thedemocratic party. When,
therefore, o prominent wing senator like Mr..
Dixon proposes to 60 beyond Judge Douglas,
and beyond the compromise of 1850, in show
ing his devotion to the rights of the south, it
may not be out OF order to remind our friends
that in the great issue of 1850 the body of Mr..
Dixons political friends, especially at the north,
were not prepared to go even as far as the Ne
braska bill goes But Mr.. Dixons amend
ment may serve to stir up excitement on one
side, whilst Mr.. Summers will effect the like
object on the other; and as whigism and aboi-
tionism have everything to gain and nothing
to lose, the upshot may be that the agitation
may inure to the benefit of the compromise OBJ
position to the democratic party. Prudence, pa
triotism, devotion to the Union, the interest of
the democratic party-all suggest that that
public sentiment which now acquiesces cheer
fully in the principles of the compromise of
1850 should not be inconsiderately disturbed
The triumphant election of President Pierce
shows that on this basis the hearts and the
judgments Of the people are with the demo-
cracy. We may venture to suggest that it is
well worthy of consideration whether a faithful
adherence to the creed which has been SO tri-
umphantly endorsed by the people, does not
require all good democrats to hesitate and re.
fleet maturey upon any proposition, which any
member of our party can object to as an inter
polation upon that creed. In word, it would
be wise in all democrats to consider whether it
would not be safest to alet well enough alone
To repeal the Missouri compromise might, and
according to our view would clear the principle
af congressional non-intervention Of all embar-
rassment; but we doubt whether the good thus
promised is so important that it would be wise
to seek it through the agitation which necessa-
rily stands in our path. Upon calm review
of the whole ground, we yet see no such rea-
sons for disturbing the compromise OF 1850 as
could induce us to advocate either ofthe amend
ments proposed to Mr.. Douglass bill.