Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-11-07

ua1nz~~&@1s~----~~n4As~u~p .~@A<~sn1uSnmnSs@.zlsa
ment and not for opposing II. In their local plat
form they lay down propositions touching State
rights and State remedies against the encroach-
ments Of the Federal Government Butt may be
objected that party cannot consistently stand
upon more than Que platform. But neither does
this objection lie In the mouth Of Democrats, for
we justify ourselves by their example. They, as
members of national party, stand upon the Balt-
more platform, while they claim 70 be Southern
Rights party, standing upon the Georgia platform.
And il you viii inspect tho aforementioned plat
form you will find that, from the nature OF things,
it could not be Incorporated with that Of Bati-
more for II states several contingencies, diejunc-
lively, upon which the State Of Georgia will seccde
from the Union. But it is said that the greater
part of your American fellow-ctizens once belong
cd to Wing party, and cannot be trusted on
Southscn Rights platform. n. sss
But beg to remind you that the Georgia plat
form was tho work Of Georgia Wings, under the
auspices of Toombs, Stephens and Dawson, and 1t
does not seem suitable 10 modesty or decorum TO
mount platform constructed by other people, and
kick the builders of as unworthy to stand ipon 1t.
Nor will it do to say that all the American party
South will not stand up TO the Southern platform
for far, far IL i from being true that all the Demo-
cratic party South will
DO not understand me us meaning to arraign the
Democratic party as being equally in fault with the
American party, and 10 make an er pdrtc argu-
msnt for the one, by impugning the other. On
the contrary, justify the Democratic party South
for the relations 1t has assumed towards its North
crn ally. No party South should commit all its
political interests to National platform, or sub
ect them to the jurisdiction and control of tho Ma
tional conventions which make these platforms.
There are the same reasons against consolidated
party as against consolidated government. Par
ties should stand upon the Federal idea and con-
49, -~f4 a Ia sal
because it has not been 80 heretofore that both
parties have been kept under Northern influence,
and the South been forced to abandon some right
whenever new platform had to DO constructed.
Abolition olfends no party North, except as it en-
dangers the Union; but it will never be supposed
to endanger the Union, unless you stand firmly on
a Southern platform II you resolve to save the
Union, no party North win be disposed to quarrel
with their neighbors for your sake, but both will
rather compete for the Abolition vote. Ibeg you,
one and all, TO keep this in mind, and let us hear
no more of Union parties South. But do not
imagine 1t a good reason for repudiating Northern
men, that they consider the Union, in every sense
the paramount good. am perfectly willing that
overy mau North should believe the Union para
mount to liberty itself, even the liberty of the
white man fer, in that case, / should know for q
certainty that it would never be made subordinate
to negro libcrty-never be put in jeopardy for the
sake Of Abolition.
Thus, you will see, that we make no war upon
the principles appropriate to the old Democratic
party--we seek to revive none of the issues which
brought that party into existence, but we propose
platform upon which men of both the old parties
can unite, except they take issue upon the ques-
ton OF the distinctive rights Of political Romanism
and political aliensm. If it should be asked why
| use the words Popery and Romanism, or Popery,
and not Catholicity.
why, then, do wish to superscde the National
Democratic organization? / answer, because that
organization is incapable of protecting the South
from aggression and can only preserve its own
existence by continued sacrifices on the part
Of the South and thus the very instinct Of self.
preservation In the party operates TO reduce the
vitality Of the South. Give me patient hearing,
while I speak the naked truth upon this point.
And shall speak upon the assumption that you
all desire the preservation of the Union, and ex-
pect, as matter of course, 10 maintain party aif
istions with the North.
The National Democratic party cannot protect
YOU, because 1t cannot control the North. IL can
not control the North, because:
r,h mi x that the issues which hinnght the party
n.o oe,hs navu Dcur a,-rosed Of and can never be
refWeu, the naiiohai organisation stands upon
single idea, and that onesided idea--pro-slavery
2. BY persisting in an old name, IL commemo
rates and protracts old rivalies, revengcs recrim
nations and villi6catons; thus parayzing the
South and keeping In state Of division those OF
both parties North, who might be willing TO make
battle for US, even upon the one-sded one idea-cx
posing them to the resistlcss force of q balance.
power party.
As to the first reason; Slavery does not exist in
the Northern States, and does not exist by the
choice and will OF the people. They, therefore,
cannot be pro-slavery people. So far, then, as
their interest and notions Of right and policy arc
concerned, you can expect nothing from them ex-
cept upon their constitutional obligations. But
they claim 10 judge for themselves what their con-
stitutionl obligations arc They, therefore, must
believe that Congress has no power to abolish sla-
very In the District Of Columbia-no power 10
abolish the slave trade among tho Ststes-no
power 10 exclude slavery from the Territories
they must believe all this or else there win be no
sense of constitutional obligation to concede your
demands, in regard to the several points.
But what is their Judgment on the constitution :
With small exception for the last few years. there
has never existed class Of politicians at the North
who did not hold the position that Congress can
abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and
exclude ID from the Territories. II is matter Of
record that Southern men have held the same opin-
ion, but have resisted the policy as unjust 10 the
South. Our Federal Jurisprudence seems every
where TO favor the idea. The question: believe,
was first made in the celebrated Missouri contro-
versy. But the agitation on that occasion grew
out OF the attempt TO force the abolition of slavery
in the State Of Missouri for Missouri bad already
become State, by virtue OF an act OF Congress,
though not yet in the Union, as Mr.. Lowndes
demonstrated TO the satisfaction Of everybody
The attempt TO coerce the State having been absn-
doned, the South very generally, perhaps nearly
unanimously, voted for the Compromise line--it
being the southern boundary Of Missouri extended
westwardly--and the agitation ceased, except In
the North. Mr.. Jefferson, however, was alarmed
Mt this line Of demarkation. He thought it q sol
emn portent--but a portcnt of disunion, not Of
abolition. His fears were for the Union--he was
not very apt 10 be alarmed at the prospect OF
emancipation.
[ro M CONTINUED.