Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1855-06-16


we differ from the Washington Union. If We
understand the article in the Union; II il has any
meaning at all, il means that the questionable
phoie question Of slavery--shall be excluded from
the Democratic creed. We are aware that the
article referred to is literally besprnkled with
the phrase abstract" But we understand this
word to be used with no other purpose than TO
perplex and confuse When the Union states its
proposition-the point for which il contends-no
such word "abstract" occurs. Mark the Ian
guage it employs. tt says:
s'These truths will command ready assent, and
they demonstrate The proposition that no party
bracing members al the .hcrfh and The South can be
national harmonious IN lis organic ation whieh
does not erelude the question Of slareyy from lis
creed"
"Which does not ereiude The question cfsl0rery
from its creed" II does not say the abstract ques
tion-but "the question:" Now, we contend that
there is contest between northern and southern
men in regard TO the abstract question ofslavery.
| Nor does the Democratic party in its national
conventions, require northern men to declare ttrt
they are in favor of slavery in the abstract. MI
| it demands Of them is the protection Of slave
property and the observance and execution of the
expressed and implied guarantees of the Constitu-
| ton.
| Now we contend, notwithstanding all the ora
cular antiquities, notwithstanding all the dexte-
rous and amphibious phrases OF the Unions ar
ticle, that when itproposes that the Democratic
party shall ssexclude slavery from its creed, " it
| means to release the Democrats OF the non
| slayeholding States from any obligation to give
| to their Southern and slaveholding brethren
pledges Of protection. 1t means to reject, exclude,
pretermt, and ignore slavery, as an element in
| the Democratic national platform. 1t either
| means that, or il means nothing. If we mistake
| and mistate it-and many other journals Of high
standing agree with us-why does not tho Union
| correct us' Surely the subject is Of such gravity
and Importance as to call for such correction.
| In the above remarks the writer in the En-
qGirsr will find full answer to his communion
i ton. We do not doubt that u second reading of
the article in the Union will convince him that
our construction of the illtimed riddle is correct
| He will find that it is not the .sabstract' but
"the (whole) question Of siarery" that the Union
proposes to exclude from the Democratic creed.
| IL he is regular reader Of the Washington
| Union and is endowed with reasonably tena-
cious memory he will readily call to mind SO
many contradictions, Inconsistencies, and contra
rites, in the columns of that journal, effectu-
tually to explode his theory in regard to 'absur-
dities'' But enough. We shall await with pa
thence the long deferred explanation of the Union.
We shall not be surprised to see it in short time
declaring that any party which Excludes the
question of slavery from its creed" (the very
thing which it now proposes,) is "deceitful above
all things, and desperately wicked"
~ Since writing the above we have seen the
Union of yesterday, which contains the follow
ing:
"OUR PosITIoN ON THE SLAVERY QuEsTIoN.-
| To avoid the possibility of disturbing in any re-
spect the harmony of the Democratic party, we
have adhered constantly TO the resolution to en-
gage in political discussions with our neigh
bors of the Sentinel. We intend to carry out this
resolution, for the same reason that it origi-
naly adopted In yielding to the request of
friend to insert the article below, which appeared
in the Richmond Enquirer Of the 18th instant as
a communication we do SO because we desire to
acknowledge obligations to the writer, who
has so clearly and accurately construed our posi-
ton, but with view of departing from the rule
which we have heretofore followed
The Union takes the ground that the cores
pendent of the Richmond Enquirer has .'clearly
and accurately construed" its position on the sla-
very question.
To construe, is defined to be $50 shop the signi-
fcation or meaning, The explanation or interpreia-
Ifion; 10 explain, TO interpret"
The Union has inserted the article from the
Enquirer, and thus indirectly at least departed
from its rule ''to engage in political discus
sions with" the Sentinel The reason assigned
by the Union for this departure from its rule is,
because it desires to acknowledge its obligations
to the writer who has SO clearly and accurately
sho,on The Specification meaning, the explanation
or Interpretation of its article entitled "The De-
mocratic Position on the Slavery Question"
The explanation or Interpretation of the Unions
article leaves the public in possession of the fact
that its labored article had reference TO the alb
straet question Of slavery only. The title of the
article, with this showing of the Specification or
meaning might be amended with advantage. 1t
might properly read The Democratic Position
on the abstract question of slavery Amending
the title TO conform TO the " clear and accu-
rate" showing Of The Specification, and the ques-
ton arises-might not the labored article Of the
Union have been altogether omitted The Demo
cratic party have never taken position on the
abstract question of slavery.
The abstract question has not been source Of
difficulty with the Democratic party North or
South. The South has never asked Of the North
the adoption OF "sentments' Of any kind, and, in
the abstract view, there no dangers involved
in the questions" as the Union suggests.
We republish the communication Of the En-
quirer's correspondent.
ELECTION OF UNITED STATES SEN